Skip to main content

Full text of "The Conqueror and his companions"

See other formats 


THE  CONQUEROR  AND  HIS 
COMPANIONS. 


\4  1 1 1) a m  X     the  t&na us,* or     K . r> &  o £    bn £ / fl v>« 
—  *  ft  ~       ^  ""** 


THE    CONQUEBOR 


AND 


HIS   COMPANIONS. 


&  . 

.<*• 


F.   Er  BLANCHE, 

SOMERSET  HERALD. 


"  We  find  but  few  historians  of  all  ages  who  have  been  diligent  enough  in  their 
search  for  truth.  It  is  their  common  method  to  take  on  trust  what  they  dis- 
tribute to  the  Public,  by  which  means  a  falsehood  once  received  from  a  famed 
writer  becomes  traditional  to  posterity." — DRYDEN,  Character  of  Polybius. 


IN   TWO  VOLUMES. 
VOL.  II. 


LONDON : 

TINSLEY  BROTHEES,  8,  CATHERINE  STREET,  STRAND. 

1874. 

[Att  rights  reserved.] 


LONDON  : 
BRADBURY,   AGNEW,   &  CO.,    PEINTERS,   WHITEFRIARS. 


Of\ 


\J.1 


CONTENTS. 


CHAPTER  I. 

PAGE 

Raoul  do  Gael,  Earl  of  Norfolk — Hugh  d'Avranches,  Earl  of 
Chester — Geoffrey  de  Mowbray,  Bishop  of  Coutanoes — Roger 
de  Mowbray  (his  brother) 1 

CHAPTEE  II. 

Richard  de  Bienfaite — Baldwin  de  Meules — "Richard  de  Redvers 

— Gilbert  do  Montfichet — Roger  le  Bigod      ....       33 

CHAPTER  III. 

Humphrey  de  Bohun — Henry  de  Ferrers — Geoffrey  de  Mande- 

ville — Hugh  do  Grentmesnil — Richard  de  Courci          .         .      63 

CHAPTER  IV. 

William  de  Albini — William  Malet — William  de  Vieuxpont — 

Raoul  Taisson — William  de  Moulins — Hugh  de  Gournay    .      90 


CHAPTER  V. 

William  de  Mohun — Eudo    al    Chapel — Eudo    Dapifer — Fulk 

d'Aunou — Richard  de  Nevil  .         .         .120 


CHAPTER  VI. 

Xeel  de  Saint- Sauveur — William  de  Roumare — The  Chamberlain 
of  Tanker ville — Urso  d'Abitot — Walter  and  Ilbert  de  Lacy 
— Robert  and  Ivo  de  Vesci — Euguenulf  de  FAigle  .  .HO 

VOL.    II.  b 


vi  CONTENTS. 


CHAPTEK  VII. 

Kobert  Marmion — Hugh  de  Beauchamp — "William  de  Percy — 

Robert  Fitz  Erneis — "William  Patry  de  la  Lande  .        .        .167 


CHAPTER  VIII. 

"William  Crispin — Ayenel  de  Biarz — Fulk  d' Aulnay — Bernard  de 

St.  Valeri— Eobert  d'Oiley— Jean  d'lvri       .         .         .         .191 


CHAPTER  IX. 

Raoul  de  Fougeres — Errand  de  Harcourt — William  Pale  el — • 
Walter  d'Aincourt — Samson  d'Ansneville — Hamo  de  Creve- 
coeur — Picot  de  Say  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .225 

CHAPTER  X. 

Robert  Bertram — Ilugli  de  Port — William   de   Colombieres — 

Eobert  d'Estouteville — William  Peverel       .         .        .        .247 

CHAPTER  XI. 

Companions  of  the  Conqueror  unidentified,  or  of  whose  personal 

history  nothing  has  hitherto  been  discovered        .         .         .     276 


INDEX  303 


THE    CONQUEROR    AND    HIS 
COMPANIONS. 


CHAPTER  I. 

RAOUL  DE  GAEL,  EARL  OF  NORFOLK. 
HUGH  D'AVRANCHES,  EARL  OF  CHESTER. 
GEOFFREY  DE  MOWBRAY,  BISHOP  OF  COUTANCES. 
ROGER  DE  MOWBRAY  (HIS  BROTHER). 


RAOUL  DE  GAEL,  EAEL  OF  NORFOLK. 

"  Joste  la  Compagnie  de  Neel, 
Chevalcha  Raoul  de  Gael." 

Roman  de  Ron,  1.  13,624. 

HERE  is  another  mysterious  companion,  respecting 
whom  much  labour  and  speculation  have  been 
expended  in  vain.  All  our  historians  are  agreed  upon 
the  fact  that  the  Consulate  of  the  East  Angles,  com- 
prising the  counties  of  Norfolk  and  Suffolk  and  part 
of  Cambridge,  was  given  by  William  the  Conqueror  to 
one  of  his  followers  named  Raoul,  or  Ralph,  indif- 


VOL.   II. 


THE  CONQUEKOK  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

ferently  designated  Guader,  Waher,  Gwyder,  Gael, 
Waite,  Ware,  and  even  Vacajet,  so  that  it  is  almost 
difficult  to  believe  the  writers  are  all  of  them  really 
speaking  of  the  same  individual. 

This  Raoul,  however,  who  was  one  of  the  principal 
leaders  of  the  Bretons  in  the  great  expedition  of 
William,  and  received,  as  we  are  told,  in  reward  of  his 
services  the  earldoms  of  Norfolk  and  Suffolk,  married, 
some  say  with  the  consent,  others  in  positive  defiance 
of,  his  sovereign,  Emma,  daughter  of  William  Fitz 
Osbern,  the  great  Earl  of  Hereford,  and  sister  of  his 
son  and  successor,  Roger  de  Breteuil,  and  on  his  very 
wedding-day  joined  with  his  brother-in-law  and 
Waltheof,  Earl  of  Northumberland,  in  a  plot  against 
King  William,  which  might  speedily  have  terminated 
the  reign  of  the  Conqueror  had  not  Waltheof,  repent- 
ing almost  in  the  same  breath,  denounced  the  con- 
spirators, first  to  Lanfranc,  Archbishop  of  Canterbury, 
and  then,  by  his  advice,  to  the  King  himself,  who  was 
at  that  time  in  Normandy.  Roger,  Earl  of  Hereford, 
was  seized  and  thrown  into  prison,  out  of  which  he 
never  came  alive;  but  Raoul,  Earl  of  Norfolk,  for- 
tunately escaped  to  Denmark.  His  wife  heroically 
defended  the  Castle  of  Norwich  until  she  could  make 
honourable  terms  for  herself  and  the  Bretons  under  her 
command.  Ralph,  after  ineffectually  attempting  an 


KAOUL  DE  GAEL. 


inroad  with  some  forces  hastily  raised  in  Denmark., 
retired  to  Brittany,  where  he  found  refuge  and  protec- 
tion with  Hoel  V.,  Count  of  Brittany,  and  in  1075, 
on  King  William's  laying  siege  to  Dol,  threw  himself 
into  the  place  with  Alain  Fergant,  the  son  and  suc- 
cessor of  Hoel,  and  defended  it  valiantly  against  the 
royal  forces.  Eventually  Raoul,  with  his  brave  and 
faithful  Countess,  made  a  pilgrimage  to  the  Holy 
Land,  in  which  the  mortal  career  of  both  is  said  to 
have  terminated. 

These  few  facts,  stated  in  as  few  words,  are  to-be 
found  with  little  variation  in  all  our  English  annalists, 
occasionally  accompanied  by  a  note  or  a  parenthesis, 
containing  an  assertion  or  a  suggestion  respecting  the 
parentage  of  this  traitorous  and  ungrateful  nobleman. 

The  Saxon  Chronicle,  which  has  been  followed  by 
some  of  the  early  historians,  says,  under  date  1075, 
"  This  year  King  William  gave  Earl  Ralph  the  daughter 
of  William  Fitz  Osbern  to  wife.  The  said  Ralph 
was  Bryttisc  (British)  on  his  mother's  side,  and  his 
father  was  an  Englishman  named  Ralph,  and  born  in 
Norfolk.  The  King,  therefore,  gave  his  son  the  earl- 
doms of  Norfolk  and  Suffolk,  who  then  brought  his  wife 
to  Norwich,  but — 

"  There  was  that  bride-ale 
The  source  of  men's  bale. 

B  2 


4  THE  CONQUEROR  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

"It  was  Earl  Roger  and  Earl  Ralph  who  were 
authors  of  that  plot,  and  who  enticed  the  Britons 
(Bryttens)  to  them,  and  sent  each  to  Denmark  after  a 
fleet  to  assist  them,"  &c. 

In  contradiction  to  the  above  statement,  that  the 
King  gave  to  Earl  Ralph  the  daughter  of  Fitz  Osbern 
to  wife,  the  majority  of  the  Norman  historians  contend 
that  the  match  was  for  unknown  reasons  strictly  pro- 
hibited by  the  King ;  and  in  as  positive  opposition  to 
the  assertion  that  Earl  Ralph  was  British  on  his 
mother's  side,  William  of  Malmesbury,  who  calls  him 
Ralph  de  Waher,  says  he  was  a  Briton  on  his  father 's 
side  ("  Brito  ex-patre  "),  and  of  a  disposition  foreign  to 
anything  good.  Matthew  Paris  and  Matthew  of  West- 
minster both  call  him,  and  not  his  father,  an  English- 
man born  in  Norfolk,  and  by  his  mother  s  side  of 
British  parentage,  "  which/'  .says  Dugdale,  "  they 
understand  -to  be  Welsh  ;  but  others  say  he  was  of 
Brittany  in  France,  which  is  the  more  likely  in  regard 
he  was  the  owner  of  the  Castle  of  Guader,  in  that 
province."  Here  we  begin  to  approximate  the  truth, 
for  Guillaume  de  Jumie'ges,  in  describing  the  issue  of 
William  Fitz  Osbern,  says  that  one  of  his  daughters 
named  Emma  is  married  to  Radulf  de  Waiet,  "genere 
Britoni  qui  fuit  comes  Norwicensis  ; "  and  Wace,  in 
his  chronicle,  says  distinctly,  "Next  the  company  of 


EAOUL  DE  GAEL. 


Neel  rode  Raol  de  Gael.  He  was  himself  a  Breton 
and  led  Bretons.  He  served  for  the  land  he  had,  but 
he  had  it  a  short  time  enough,  for  he  forfeited  it  as 
they  say." 

In  the  paper  I  read  at  the  Norwich  Congress  of  the 
British  Archaeological  Association  in  1857,  I  gave 
my  reasons  for  believing  Raoul  dc  Gael  to  be  a  son  of 
Ralf,  Earl  of  Hereford,  in  the  reign  of  Edward  the 
Confessor,  who  is,  I  think,  unfairly  accused  of  cowardice 
in  consequence  of  the  flight  of  his  troops,  raw  levies, 
hastily  raised,  and  compelled  to  fight  on  horseback,  to 
which  they  were  unaccustomed,  against  the  combined 
Irish  and  Welsh  forces  under  Algar,  son  of  Leofric, 
in  1055.  I  have  seen  nothing  since  to  induce  me  to 
alter  my  opinion.  * 

This  Ralph  was  a  son  of  Goda,  sister  of  Edward  the 
Confessor,  by  her  first  husband,  Dreux,  Count  of  the 
Vexin,  of  Pontoise,  Chaumont,  and  Amiens,  and 
nephew,  consequently,  of  the  English  King.  Sir 
Henry  Ellis,  in  his  Introduction  to  Domesday,  has 
shown  that  the  wife  of  Ralph  is  named  in  the  survey 
as  Getha  and  Gueth,  who  held  lands  in  Buckingham- 
shire ;  but  though  identifying  her  as  the  mother  of 
Harold,  Lord  of  Sudeley,  he  does  not  allude  to  any 
other  issue.  The  name  of  Getha  is  certainly  not 
Norman,  and  we  find  her  acknowledged  son  named 


THE  CONQUEBOR  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 


Harold,  tending  to  show  that  she  was  of  Saxon  origin, 
which  view  is  supported  by  entries  in  Domesday  of  a 
Godwin,  "  uncle  of  Earl  Ralph,"  and  an  Alsio  (Alsy), 
"  nephew  of  Earl  R.,"  holding  land  in  the  time  of 
King  Edward. 

Ralph,  who  is  called  Earl  of  Hereford  by  the 
majority  of  the  historians,  is  expressly  described  by 
the  old  Norman  poet  Gaimar  as  Earl  of  the  East 
Angles.  He  tells  us  that  Count  Leuric  (Leofric)  held 
Norfolk,  and  that  on  his  death  Raoul  (Ralph)  was  seised 
of  his  honour,  but  held  it  for  a  very  short  time,  and 
was  buried  at  Peterborough,  then  called  Burgh,  Count 
Leofric  being  buried  at  Coventry. 

In  Duchesne's  list  of  the  names  of  Normans  who 
flourished  in  England  before  the  Conquest,  occurs 
"  Ralph,  Comes  Est  Anglice,  pater  Heraldi  dominus  de 
Sudely,"  and  in  that  of  nobles  living  in  the  twentieth 
year  of  King  William  the  Conqueror,  "  Radulfus,  Comes 
Est  Anglia?,"  is  marked  as  "  mortuus  antea." 

With  all  due  deference,  therefore,  I  cannot  accept 
Mr.  Taylor's  suggestion,  strongly  enforced  though  it  be 
by  Mr.  Freeman,  that  Raoul  de  Gael  was  the  son  of 
Ralph  Stalra,  or  the  Staller,  nor  can  I  consent  to  hear 
him  branded  as  "  the  only  English  traitor  in  that  motley 
host,"  who  canie  to  win  back  the  lands  "  which  some 
unrecorded  treason  had  lost  him."  I  protest  against 


RAOUL  DE  GAEL. 


this  groundless  accusation  of  a  loyal  and  gallant  soldier, 
who,  in  1069,  had  repulsed  an  invasion  of  the  Danes 
at  Norwich  while  his  sovereign  was  amusing  himself 
with  chasing  the  deer  in  the  Forest  of  Dean.  What 
are  the  words  of  Wace?  "He  served  for  the  land 
he  had."  Does  this  imply  that  he  had  previously 
forfeited  it  by  treason  ?  I  think  I  can  prove  that  he 
was  a  man  u  more  sinned  against  than  sinning." 

Walter  de  Mantes,  Ralph  Earl  of  Hereford's  eldest 
brother  (according  to  my  theory),  was,  together  with 
his  wife,  Biota,  basely  poisoned  at  Falaise  by  William 
the  Conqueror  in  1065,  in  order  to  secure  possession 
of  the  donate"  of  Maine,  the  reversion  of  which  was,  it 
is  said,  bequeathed  to  him  by  Biota's  father  after  the 
decease  of  Hugh  or  Herbert,  Walter  claiming  it  in 
right  of  his  wife,  and  being  the  popular  candidate. 

This  infamous  act  is  passed  over  in  silence  by  most 
of  the  Norman  historians,  but  Orderic  Vital,  in  his 
account  of  the  fatal  "  bride-ale  "  of  Ixingham,  where 
the  conspiracy  against  William  was  formed  by  Roger 
de  Breteuil  and  Raoul  de  Gael,  represents  the  latter 
as  making  this  double  murder  one  of  the  charges 
against  the  Norman  King  of  England,  whom  he 
accuses,  and  with  good  reason,  of  having  also  caused 
the  poisoning  of  Conan,  Duke  of  Brittany,  and  of  other 
foul  and  tyrannical  actions.  "  He  who  now  bears  the 


8  THE   CONQUEKOB  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

title  of  King,"  the  Earl  is  reported  to  have  said,  "  is 
unworthy  of  it,  being  a  bastard,  and  it  is  evident  that 
it  is  unpleasing  to  God  that  such  a  monster  should 
govern  the  kingdom. 

"He  disinherited  and  drove  out  of  Normandy  William 
Werlenc,  Count  of  Mortain,  for  a  single  word.  Walter, 
Count  of  Pontoise,  nephew  of  King  Edward  and  Biota, 
his  wife,  being  his  guests  at  Falaise,  were  both  his 
victims  by  poison  in  one  and  the  same  night.  Conan 
also  was  taken  off  by  poison  at  William's  instigation 
—that  valiant  Count  whose  death  was  mourned 
through  the  whole  of  Brittany  with  unutterable  grief 
on  account  of  his  great  virtues.  These  and  other  such 
crimes  have  been  perpetrated  by  William  in  the  case 
of  his  own  kinsfolk  and  relations,  arid  he  is  ever 
ready  to  act  the  same  part  towards  us  and  our 
peers." 

There  is  tolerable  evidence  that  all  these  charges 
are  well  founded,  at  any  rate  they  are  not  contra- 
dicted by  Orderic,  who  recites  them,  and  they  have 
never  been  disproved,  and  if  I  am  correct  in  my 
deductions,  we  have  here  a  very  strong  justification  of 
Raoul  de  Gael's  rebellion,  which  has  been  represented 
by  the  partial  Norman  writers  and  their  modern 
copyists  as  a  monstrous  piece  of  ingratitude. 

Walter  de  Mantes  and  Biota  were,  according  to  my 


EAOUL  DE  GAEL. 


opinion,  the  uncle  and  aunt  of  Raoul  de  Gael,  and  to 
Conan,  Duke  of  Brittany,  the  Conqueror's  other  victim, 
Raoul  would  owe  fealty  for  his  possessions,  Montfort 
and  Guader,  in  that  province ;  while  to  those  in  England 
he  had  naturally  succeeded  on  the  death  of  his  father, 
the  old  Earl  Ralph,  and  had  consequently  been  re- 
warded by  William  for  his  assistance  at  the  Conquest 
by  confirmation  only  in  his  hereditary  rights  and 
dignity, — "the  land,"  in  fact,  "which  he  had/' arid 
for  which  he  did  service. 

Place  this  unavoidable  act  of  justice,  more  than 
favour,  in  one  scale,  and  the  base  assassination  of  his 
nearest  relations  and  of  his  native  feudal  lord  in  the 
other,  added  to  the  imperious  prohibition  of  his 
marriage  with  Emma,  under  perhaps  the  most  aggra- 
vating circumstances,  for  no  reasons  wrere  ever  given, 
and  we  are  justified  in  believing  that  William,  a 
notorious  promise-breaker,  may  have  acted  towards  the 
Earl  of  Norfolk,  as  he  had  previously  done  towards 
Earl  Edwin,  to  whom  he  had  first  promised  his 
daughter,  and  then  broke  faith  with  him  and  drove 
him  into  rebellion.  Weigh,  I  repeat,  these  injuries 
against  a  questionable  boon,  and  I  think  you  will  agree 
with  me,  that  the  obligations  of  the  Breton  noble  to 
the  Norman  sovereign  dwindle  down  to  a  burden  not 
very  likely  to  have  encumbered  his  conscience,  even  if 


10     THE  CONQUEROR  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS.   . 

murder  and  tyranny  could  not  legally  as  well  as  morally 
absolve  him. 

Who  shall  say  that  the  very  object  of  the  astute 
tyrant  in  forbidding  the  match — evidently  one  of 
affection — was  not  to  exasperate  his  too  powerful 
vassals  and  drive  them  into  rebellion,  as  he  had 
previously  done  Edwin  and  Morkar,  so  that  he  might 
have  a  legal  pretence,  and  of  which  he  was  always  so 
cunningly  careful,  for  seizing  on  their  large  domains 
in  England, — of  course  the  first  thing  he  did  do  1 

The  assertion  that  the  elder  Ralph  wras  an  English- 
man, born  in  Norfolk,  may  not  be  untrue,  for  his 
mother,  sister  of  Edward  the  Confessor,  might  have 
been  in  this  country,  and  in  that  county,  at  the  time  of 
his  birth ;  while  on  the  other  hand,  the  Countess  Getha, 
or  Gueth,  was  probably  in  Bretagne  when  Raoul  was 
born,  from  which  circumstance  he  might  take  the  name 
of  Gael,  as  having  first  seen  the  light  in  that  castle. 

Gael,  spelt  and  pronounced  Wael,  on  the  same 
principle  that  Guillaume  and  Gulielmus  became 
William  and  Willielmus,  was  anciently  called  Guadel, 
similarly  softened  into  Waclel.  The  relics  of  St. 
Unwin  were  deposited  in  a  monastery  there.  A 
further  commutation  of  the  final  1  for  r,  either  by  the 
Latin  chroniclers  or  their  careless  transcribers,  has 
transformed  Wael  into  Waer,  and  Guadel  into  Guader. 


EAOUL  DE  GAEL.  11 


The  other  varieties,  Gader,  Guaer,  Waher,  Ware,  and 
Waiet  are  evidently  errors  either  of  the  scribe  or  the 
printer,  and  Gwyder  is  obviously  a  guess  originating 
in  the  tradition  of  a  Welsh  mother,  which  if  Gueth  be 
a  corruption  of  Gwyneth  is  not  to  be  hastily  discarded, 
particularly  when  we  remember  her  husband  was  Earl 
of  Hereford.  Vacajet,  which  occurs  in  "  Neustria 
Pia,"  and  once  in  Maurice's  "Histoire  de  Bretagne," 
may  be  the  name  of  some  other  lordship  by  which 
Raoul  was  occasionally  called,  as  he  appears  as  Ralph 
de  Montfort  and  Ralph  de  Dol,  both  castles  in  Brittany 
belonging  to  himself  or  his  family,  and  in  the  latter  of 
which  he  was  besieged  by  King  William  after  his 
escape  from  Norwich.  That  he  has  not  been  mentioned 
as  the  brother  of  Harold,  Lord  of  Sudeley,*  need 
surprise  no  one  who  has  any  experience  of  the  laxity 
of  the  old  chroniclers  on  such  matters.  In  the  pre- 
ceding volume  many  instances  have  been  pointed  out 
of  their  silence,  either  through  ignorance  or  neglect  of 
genealogical  points,  of  equal,  if  not  more  importance. 
Few  English  antiquaries  besides  the  late  Mr.  Stapleton 
have  turned  their  serious  attention  to  the  investigation 
of  the  descents  of  the  followers  of  the  Conqueror, 
proud  as  thousands  are  of  tracing  up  their  pedigrees 

*  Harold  was  a  minor  in  1066,  in  ward  of  the  Lady  (Queen)  Ead- 
gyth.  Eaoul,  according  to  my  view,  was  his  elder  brother  and  in 
possession  of  his  patrimonial  estates  in  Brittany. 


12  THE   CONQUEROE  AND  HIS   COMPANIONS. 

to  tlieni  and  through  them  to  Charlemagne,  while 
others  delight  in  denouncing  them  as  Richard  III., 
according  to  Shakespere,  does  the  followers  of  another 
fortunate  invader, — "  a  scum  of  Bretons,"  and — 

"  overweening  rags  of  France, 
Who,  but  for  dreaming  on  this  fond  exploit, 
For  want  of  means,  poor  rats,  had  hanged  themselves." 

A  mere  horde,  in  fact,  of  military  adventurers  attracted 
by  the  prospect  of  plunder  and  power. 

In  the  latter  class  we  have  hitherto  been  led  to  place 
Raoul  de  Gael,  but  if  I  have  correctly  affiliated  him, 
the  blood  of  Charlemagne  did  run  in  his  veins,  for  his 
grandfather  was  the  son  of  Alice,  or  Adele,  daughter 
of  Herbert,  Count  of  Senlis, — a  scion  of  a  younger 
branch  of  the  Counts  of  Vermandois,  and  with  their 
blood  was  mingled  that  of  the  Saxon  sovereigns  of 
England,  for  he  was  the  great-grandson  of  Ethelred, 
King  of  England.* 

Royal  lineage,  however,  would  not  advance  him  in 
the  reader's  estimation  were  he  still  stained  with  treason 
and  branded  with  ingratitude.  His  rank  would  rather 
give  a  deeper  dye  to  his  delinquency.  But  in  estab- 
lishing his  parentage  according  to  my  theory,  a  clear 
light  is  thrown  upon  his  conduct.  A  rebel  he 

*  Have  we  here  by  accident  lighted  on  the  unrevealed  reason  of  the 
Conqueror's  opposition  to  the  marriage  ?  Utterly  to  root  out  the  royal 
Saxon  race  was  his  constant  anxiety,  and  unscrupulously  did  he  labour 
to  effect  his  objects.  What  became  of  the  younger  brother,  Harold  f: 


BAOUL  DE  GAEL.  13 


undoubtedly  was  ;  but  it  was  against  a  felon  king,  the 
dastardly  assassin  of  Raoul's  kinsfolk,  whilst  he  was 
their  host, — 

"  Who  should  against  the  murderer  bar  the  door, 
Not  bear  the  knife  himself," 

and  of  a  liege  lord  to  whom  the  noble  Breton  was 
equally  bound.  It  was  against  a  faithless  tyrant,  who 
had  abused  the  power  to  which  he  had  helped  to  raise 
him,  by  flinging  for  some  dark  purpose  a  barrier  be- 
tween him  and  the  chosen  of  his  heart,  for  that  his 
union  with  the  daughter  of  Fitz  Osbern  was  one 
of  mutual  affection  is  surely  proved  by  her  gallant 
defence  of  Norwich  Castle  whilst  her  husband  was 
seeking  aid  from  his  friends  in  Denmark,  and  the 
ultimate  pilgrimage  of  the  Earl  and  Countess  to 
Palestine,  where  they  found  a  peaceful  grave  together. 

By  one  of  those  remarkable  circumstances  which 
are  popularly  termed  judgments,  the  city  of  Mantes 
proved  fatal  to  the  ferocious  and  perfidious  Norman, 
and  avenged  the  double  murder  of  its  rightful  lord  and 
his  Countess  Biota. 

Raoul  de  Gael  had  by  his  Countess  Emma  three  sons  : 
the  eldest,  William,  died  in  1102,  Raoul,  who  suc- 
ceeded him,  and  Alain,  who  accompanied  his  father  to 
Palestine  and  perhaps  never  returned.  Raoul  the 
second,  also  called  De  Gael,  was  taken  into  favour  by 


14     THE  CONQUEEOE  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 


Henry  L,  King  of  England,  to  whose  illegitimate  son 
Richard  he  affianced  his  daughter  Ita  or  Avicia,  with  the 
full  consent  of  the  King,  who  settled  on  her,  as  a  marriage 
portion,  the  barony  of  Breteuil  and  the  lands  of  Lire  and 
Glos,  which  had  belonged  to  her  grandmother's  family, 
Richard  was,  however,  drowned  in  the  wreck  of  the 
White  Ship,  and*  Avicia  afterwards  espoused  Robert  de 
Beaumont,  "  Le  Bossu "  Earl  of  Leicester.  Is  it 
likely  that  the  granddaughter  of  Ralph  the  Staller 
would  have  been  proposed  as  a  wife  for"  the  son  of 
a  king,  even  though  illegitimate  ?  Descended  as  I 
consider  her  to  be,  she  was  a  match  for  the  King  him- 
self. I  will  place  this  simple  fact  against  a  supposition 
founded  on  a  single  entry  in  Domesday,  wherein  Ralph 
the  Staller  is  given  the  title  of  "  Comes."*  He  was 
no  doubt  Comes  Stabuli,  and  so  were  two  other 
Stallers  at  the  same  period,  Esgar  and  Bondy.  But 
Raoul  de  Gael  was,  I  contend,  son  of  "  Radulfus, 
Comes  Est  Angliae,"  and  not  of  an  officer  of  the 
Royal  Household,  who  cannot  for  a  moment  be  placed 
in  the  rank  of  the  "  Master  of  the  Horse  "  of  the  present 

*  "  Benetleiam  tenuit  Comes  Guert.  T.  E.  E.  posteam  adjunxit. 
Comes  Badulfus  Stalra  huic  manerio  pro  berewita,  T.  E.  Willelmi." 
A  Ealf  Eegis  "  Dapifer  "  and  a  Ealf  "  Minister  "  appear  as  witnesses 
to  charters  of  the  same  period,  but  they  cannot  be  identified  with 
Ealph  the  Staller.  A  "  Eadulphus  Dapifer  "  was  an  under  tenant  in 
Northamptonshire.  There  are  between  thirty  and  forty  Ealphs  men- 
tioned in  Domesday,  not  one  third  of  whom  could  be  identified. 


EAOUL  DE  GAEL.  15 


day,  and  whose  title  of  "  Comes  "  no  more  signified  Earl 
than  that  of  constable  does  the  dignity  of  that  great 
officer  of  state,  "  the  Lord  High  Constable  of  Eng- 
land," though  derived  from  the  same  root,  the  Count 
of  the  Stable.  Raoul  de  Gael  was  a  powerful  baron 
of  Brittany,  lord  of  the  Castles  of  Guader  and  Mont- 
fort  °  and  large  domains,  which  we  are  distinctly  in- 
formed were  his  patrimonial  estates,  and  could  not  be 
affected'  by  his  attainder  in  England,  and  to  which  his 
sons  succeeded  by  hereditary  right.  Is  there  the 
slightest  evidence  that  Ralph  the  Staller  was  ever  Lord  of 
Guader  and  Montfort,  or  of  a  rood  of  land  in  Brittany  ? 
The  confusion  has  been  caused  by  Ralph  the  Earl  and 
Ralph  the  Staller  having  each  a  son  Ralph,  but  there 
is  this  remarkable  distinction,  the  son  of  the  Earl  is 
invariably  styled  Comes,  whereas  the  son  of  the 
Staller,  called  "  Comes,"  is  simply  named  Ralph. 

Ita  or  Avicia  Countess  of  Leicester  is  incorrectly 
set  down  by  our  modern  genealogists  as  the  daughter 
and  heir  of  Raoul  Earl  of  Norfolk,  for  whom  an  arbi- 
trary coat  of  arms  has  been  invented  which  is  quartered 
by  many  of  our  nobility.  She  was,  as  I  have  shown,  his 
granddaughter,  and  not  his  heir ;  and  neither  he  nor 
his  son  could  ever  have  borne  coat  armour,  which  made 
its  first  appearance  in  the  reign  of  Henry  II. 

*  Montfort-sur-Mer,  near  Eennes. 


16  THE  CONQUEEOE  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 


HUGH  D'AVEANCHES,  EAEL  OF  CHESTEE. 

Here  is  a  personage  who,  under  the  more  popular 
name  of  Hugh  Lupus,  is  perhaps  almost  as  well  known 
as  the  Conqueror  himself. 

Wace  in  his  "  Roman  de  Rou,"  speaks  only  of  his 
father  Richard : 

"  D'Avrancin  i  fu  Eicharz." 

But  it  is  generally  contended  that  Richard  was  not  in 
the  battle,  and  that  it  was  Hugh,  his  son,  who  accom- 
panied William  to  Hastings.  The  authors  of  "Les 
Recherches  sur  le  Domesday,"  to  whom  we  are  so 
deeply  indebted  for  information  on  these  points,  hesi- 
tate to  endorse  the  opinion  of  Mons.  le  Prevost  upon 
these  grounds, — that  Richard  was  living  as  late  as 
1082,  when  he  appears  as  a  witness  to  a  charter  of 
Roger  de  Montgomeri,  in  favour  of  St.  Stephen's  at 
Caen,  to  which  also  his  son,  Earl  Hugh,  is  a  subscriber. 
Their  observations  only  point,  however,  to  the  proba- 
bility of  Richard,  who  in  1066  was  Seigneur  or  Vicomte 
of  Avranches,  having  been  in  the  Norman  army  of  in- 
vasion, as  he  survived  the  event  some  sixteen  years ; 
at  the  same  time  they  deny  that  there  is  any  proof 
that  his  son  Hugh  was  in  the  battle,  and  assert,  with- 
out stating  on  what  authority,  that  Hugh  only  joined 
the  Conqueror  in  England  after  the  victory  at  Senlac, 


HUGH  D'AVEAXCHES.  17 


when  he  rendered  the  new  King  most  important  ser- 
vices by  his  valour  and  ability  in  the  establishment  of 
William  on  the  throne,  and  contributed  greatly  towards 
the  reduction  of  the  Welsh  to  obedience.  That  there 
is  authority  for  their  assertion  appears  from  the  cartu- 
lary of  the  Abbey  of  Whitby,  quoted  by  Dugdalo  in 
his  "  Monasticon,"  *  where  we  read  distinctly  that 
Hugh  Earl  of  Chester  and  William  de  Percy  came  into 
England  with  William  the  Conqueror  in  10G7  :  "Anno 
Domini  millesimo  sexagesimo  septimo"  and  that  the 
King  gave  Whitby  to  Hugo,  which  Hugo  afterwards 
gave  to  William  de  Percy,  the  founder  of  the  abbey 
there. 

We  have  here,  therefore,  a  parallel  case  to  that  of 
Roger  de  Montgomeri,j*  and  must  similarly  treat  it  as 
an  open  question. 

The  descent  of  Richard,  surnamed  Goz,  Le  Gotz,  or 
Le  Gois,  from  Ansfrid  the  Dane,  the  first  who  bore 
that  surname,  has  been  more  of  less  correctly  recorded, 
but  in  "  Les  Recherches  "  it  will  be  found  critically 
examined  and  carried  up  to  Rongwald,  or  Raungwaldar, 
Earl  of  Msere  and  the  Orcades  in  the  days  of  Harold 
Harfager,  or  the  Fair-haired;  which  said  Rongwald 
was  the  father  of  Hrolf,  or  Rollo,  the  first  Duke  of 

*  Mon.  Aug.  vol.  i.,  p.  72. 
\  Vide  voli.,  p.  181. 

VOL.  II.  C 


18  THE  CONQUEROR  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

Normandy.  Rongwald,  like  the  majority  of  his  country- 
men and  kinsmen,  had  several  children  by  a  favourite 
slave,  whom  he  had  married  "  more  Danico"  and  Hrolf 
Turstain,  the  son  of  one  of  them,  having  followed  his 
uncle  Rollo  into  Normandy,  managed  to  secure  the 
hand  of  Gerlotte  de  Blois,  daughter  of  Thibaut  Count 
of  Blois  and  Chartres,  which  seems  to  have  been  the 
foundation  of  this  branch  of  the  great  Norse  family  in 
Normandy,  and  the  stock  from  which  descended  the 
Lords  of  Briquebec,  of  Bec-Crispin,of  Montfort-sur-Risle, 
and  others  who  figure  as  companions  of  the  Conqueror. 

The  third  son  of  Gerlotte  was  Ansfrid  the  Dane,  the 
first  Vicomte  of  the  Hiemois,  and  father  of  Ansfrid  the 
second,  surnamed  Goz,  above  mentioned,  whose  son 
Turstain  (Thurstan,  or  Toustain)  Goz  was  the  great 
favourite  of  Robert  Duke  of  Normandy,  the  father  of 
the  Conqueror,  and  accompanied  him  to  the  Holy 
Land,  and  was  intrusted  to  bring  back  the  relics  the 
Duke  had  obtained  from  the  Patriarch  of  Jerusalem  to 
present  to  the  Abbey  of  Cerisi,  which  he  had  founded. 
Revolting  against  the  young  Duke  William  in  1041,* 
Turstain  was  exiled,  and  his  lands  confiscated  and  given 
by  the  Duke  to  his  mother,  Herleve,  wife  of  Herluin 
de  Conteville. 

Richard  Goz,  Vicomte  d'Avranches,  or  more  pro- 

*  Fufevol.  i.,  p.  21. 


HUGH  D'AVRANCHES.  19 

perly  of  the  Avranchin,  was  one  of  the  sons  of  the 
aforesaid  Turstain,  by  his  wife  Judith  de  Mon- 
tanolier,  and  appears  not  only  to  have  avoided 
being  implicated  in  the  rebellion  of  his  father, 
but  obtained  his  pardon  and  restoration  to  the 
Vicomte*  of  the  Hiemois,  to  which  at  his  death  he 
succeeded,  and  to  have  strengthened  his  position  at 
court  by  securing  the  hand  of  Emma  de  Conteville, 
one  of  the  daughters. of  Herluin  and  Herleve,  and  half- 
sister  of  his  sovereign.  By  this  fortunate  marriage 
he  naturally  recovered  the  lands  forfeited  by  his  father 
and  bestowed  on  his  mother-in-law,  and  acquired  also 
much  property  in  the  Avranchin,  of  which  he  obtained 
the  Vicomte,  in  addition  to  that  of  the  Hiemois. 

There  was  every  reason,  therefore,  that  he  should 
follow  his  three  brothers-in-law  in  the  expedition  to 
England,  if  not  prevented  by  illness  or  imperative 
circumstances.  He  must  have  been  their  senior  by 
some  twenty  years,  but  still  scarcely  past  the  prime 
of  life,  and  his  son  Hugh  a  stripling  under  age,  as 
his  mother,  if  even  older  than  her  brothers  Odo  and 
Robert,  could  not  have  been  born  before  1030,  and  if 
married  at  sixteen,  her  son  in  1066  would  not  be 
more  than  nineteen  at  the  utmost.  Mr.  Freeman,  who 
places  the  marriage  of  Herleve  with  Herluin  after  the 
death  of  Duke  Robert  in  1035,  would  reduce  this 

c  2 


20  THE  CONQUEKOR  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 


calculation  by  at  least  six  years,  rendering  the  pre- 
sence of  her  grandson  Hugh  at  Senlac  more  than 
problematical.  It  is  at  any  rate  clear  that  he  must 
have  been  a  very  young  man  at  the  time  of  the 
Conquest. 

That  "  he  came  into  England  with  William  the 
Conqueror,"  as  stated  by  Dugdale,  does  not  prove 
that  he  was  in  the  army  at  Hastings,  and  is  recon- 
cilable with  the  assertion  in  the  "  Recherches,"  that 
he  joined  him  after  the  Conquest,  corroborated  by  the 
cartulary  of  Whitby,  before  mentioned ;  very  pro- 
bably coming  with  him  in  the  winter  of  10G7,  and 
in  company  with  Roger  de  Montgomeri,  respecting 
whose  first  appearance  in  England  the  same  diversity 
of  opinion  exists,  and  it  might  be  his  assistance  in 
suppressing  the  rebellion  in  the  West  and  other  parts 
of  the  kingdom  that  gained  him  the  favour  of  the  King, 
and  ultimately  the  Earldom  of  Chester,  at  that  time 
enjoyed  by  Gherbod  the  Fleming,  brother  of  Gundrada. 
The  gift  of  Whitby,  in  Yorkshire,  to  Hugh,  which 
he  soon  afterwards  gave  to  William  de  Percy,  would 
seem  to  show  that  he  had  been  employed  against  the 
rebels  beyond  the  Humber  in  1068. 

In  1071,  Gherbod  Earl  of  Chester  being  summoned 
to  Flanders  by  those  to  whom  he  had  intrusted  the 
management  of  his  hereditary  domains,  whatever  they 


HUGH  D'AVEANCHES.  21 

\vere,obtained  from  King  William  leave  to  make  a  short 
visit  to  that  country  ;  but  while  there  his  evil  fortune 
led  him  into  a  snare,  and  falling  into  the  hands  of  his 
enemies,  he  was  thrown  into  a  dungeon,  "  where  he 
endured,"  says  Orderic,  "  the  sufferings  of  a  long  cap- 
tivity, cut  off  from  all  the  blessings  of  life."  Whether 
he  ended  his  days  in  that  dungeon  Orderic  does  not  tell 
us.  A  little  more  information  respecting  this  Gherbod 
and  his  sister  would  be  a  great  boon  to  us.  At  present, 
what  we  hear  about  them  is  so  vague  that  it  looks 
absolutely  suspicious. 

In  consequence  of  this  "  evil  fortune  "  which  befell 
Gherbod,  the  King,  continues  Orderic,  gave  the  earl- 
dom of  Chester  to  Hugh  d'Avranches,  son  of  Richard, 
surnamed  Goz,  who,  in  concert  with  Robert  de  Rhud- 
dlan  and  Robert  de  Malpas,  and  other  fierce  knights, 
made  great  slaughter  amongst  the  Welsh. 

Hugh  was  in  fact  a  Count  Palatine,  and  had  the 
county  of  Chester  granted  to  him  to  hold  as  freely  by 
the  sword  as  the  King  held  the  kingdom  by  the 
crown.  He  was  all  but  a  king  himself,  and  had  a 
court,  and  barons,  and  officers,  such  as  became  a 
sovereign  prince. 

We  hear  but  little  of  him  during  the  remainder  of  the 
reign  of  William  the  Conqueror,  but  in  the  rebellion 
against  Rufus,  in  1096,  he  stood  loyally  by  his  sove- 


22  THE  CONQUEROR  AND   HIS  COMPANIONS. 

reign;  lie  is  charged,  however,  with  having  barbarously 
blinded  and  mutilated  his  brother-in-law,  William 
Comte  d'Eu,  who  had  been  made  prisoner  in  that  abor  - 
tive  uprising.  In  the  same  year  he  is  also  accused  of 
committing  great  cruelties  upon  the  Welsh  in  the  Isle 
of  Anglesea,  which  he  ravaged  in  conjunction  with 
Hugh  de  Montgomeri,  Earl  of  Shrewsbury,  who  lost 
his  life  at  that  period  in  resisting  the  landing  of  the- 
Norwegians  under  Magnus  III.,  King  of  Norway. 
The  Norse  poet  tells  us  the  Earl  of  Shrewsbury  was. 
so  completely  enveloped  in  armour  that  nothing  could 
be  seen  of  his  person  but  one  eye.  "  King  Magnus  let 
fly  an  arrow  at  him,  as  also  did  a  Heligoland  man 
who  stood  beside  the  King.  They  both  shot  at  once. 
The  one  shaft  struck  the  nose-guard  of  the  helmet, 
and  bent  it  on  one  side,  the  other  arrow  hit  the  Earl 
in  the  eye  and  passed  through  his  head,  and  this  arrow 
was  found  to  be  the  King's." 

Giraldus  Cambrensis  gives  a  similar  account,  adding- 
some  few  details,  such  as  the  derisive  exclamation  of 
Magnus,  "  Leit  loupe !  "  — "  Let  him  leap!"  as  the  Earl 
sprang  from  the  saddle  when  struck,  and  fell  dead  into 
the  sea. 

As  this  Earl  of  Shrewsbury  Avas  called  by  the 
Welsh  "  Goch,"  or  "  the  Red/'  from  the  colour  of  his 
hair,  so  was  Hugh  Earl  of  Chester  called  "  Vras,"  or 


HUGH  D'AVUANCHES.  23 

"the  Fat."  His  popular  name  of  Lupus,  or  ''the  Wolf," 
is  not  to  be  traced  to  his  own  times,  and  Dugdale  ob- 
serves that  it  was  an  addition  in  after   ages  for  the 
sake  of  distinction ;  about  the  same  time,  I  presume, 
that  the  heralds  invented  the  coat  of  arms  for  him 
— "Azure,  a  wolf's  head,  erased,  argent  " — suggested, 
probably,  by  the  name,  which,  if  indeed  of  contempo- 
rary antiquity,  might  have  been  given   him  for  his 
gluttony,  a  vice  to  which  Orderic  says  he  was  greatly 
addicted.     "  This  Hugh,"  he  tells  us,  "  was  not  merely 
liberal,  but  prodigal ;    not  satisfied  with  being    sur- 
rounded by  his  own  retainers,  he  kept  an  army  on 
foot.     He  set  no  bounds  either  to  his  generosity  or 
his  rapacity.     He  continually  wasted  even  his  own 
domains,  and  gave  more  encouragement  to  those  who 
attended  him  in  hawking  and  hunting  than  to  the  cul- 
tivators of  the  soil  or  the  votaries  of  Heaven.     He 
indulged  in  gluttony  to  such  a  degree  that  he  could 
scarcely  walk.      He  abandoned  himself  immoderately 
to  carnal   pleasures,    and   had   a  numerous  progeny 
of  illegitimate  children  of  both  sexes,  but  they  have* 
been   almost   all    carried   off    by   one   misfortune   or 
another/' 

With  all  this  he  displayed  that  curious  veneration 
for  the  Church  common  to  his  age,  which  so  ill  accorded 
with  the  constant  violation  of  its  most  divine  precepts. 


24  THE  CONQUEBOR  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

He  founded  the  Abbey  of  St.  Sever  in  Normandy,  and 
was  a  great  benefactor  to  those  of  Bee  and  Ouche 
(St.  Evroult)  in  that  duchy,  and  also  to  the  Abbey  of 
Whitby  in  Yorkshire,  and  in  1092  restored  the  ancient 
Abbey  of  St.  Werburgh  at  Chester,  and  endowed  it 
with  ample  possessions,  substituting  Benedictine  monks 
in  lieu  of  the  secular  canons  who  had  previously 
occupied  it ;  Richard,  a  monk  of  Bee,  being  brought 
over  by  Abbot  Anselm,  the  Earl's  confessor  and 
afterwards  the  great  Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  to  be 
the  first  abbot  of  the  new  community. 

Being  seized  with  a  fatal  illness,  this  pious  profligate 
assumed  the  monastic  habit  in  the  Abbey  of  St. 
Werburgh,  and  three  days  after  being  shorn  a  monk 
died  therein,  6th  kalends  of  August  (July  27),  1101. 

By  his  Countess  Ermentrude,  daughter  of  Hugh 
Comte  de  Clermont,  in  Beauvoisis,  and  Margaret  de 
Rouci,  his  wife,  he  had  one  son,  Richard,  seven  years 
of  age  at  the  time  of  his  father's  death,  who  succeeded 
him  in  the  earldom,  married  Matilda  de  Blois,  daughter 
of  Stephen,  Count  of  Blois,  by  Adela,  daughter  of 
William  the  Conqueror,  and  perished  with  his  young 
wife  in  the  fatal  wreck  of  the  White  Ship  in  1119, 
leaving  no  issue. 


GEOFFREY,   BISHOP  OF  COUTANCES.  25 


GEOFFEEY  DE  HOWBRAY,  BISHOP  OF  COUTANCES. 

Of  this  unquestioned  companion  of  the  Conqueror 
we  have  already  heard,  in  conjunction  with  his  eccle- 
siastical brother-in-arms,  Odo,  Bishop  of  Bayeux,  by 
whose  side  he  fought,  if  not  at  Senlac,  at  least  on 
other  occasions,  and  at  whose  trial  he  presided  when 
that  rapacious  primate  was  impleaded  by  Lanfranc  for 
despoiling  the  see  of  Canterbury  of  much  of  its 
property. 

Dugdale,  apparently  quoting  Orderic  Vital,  says 
that  Geoffrey,  being  of  a  noble  Norman  extraction,  and 
more  skilful  in  arms  than  divinity,  knowing  better  how 
to  train  up  soldiers  than  to  instruct  his  clergy,  was  an 
eminent  commander  in  that  signal  battle  near  Hastings, 
in  Sussex. 

The  words  of  Orderic  are  not  quite  so  precise  as 
respects  the  battle ;  he  says  that  the  Bishop  rendered 
essential  service  and  support  at  it,  but  neither  by  him  nor 
by  any  other  writer  is  it  indicated  that  he  was  intrusted 
with  a  command  in  it.  Wace  describes  him  as  re- 
ceiving confessions,  giving  benedictions,  and  imposing 
penalties  on  the  night  before  the  battle,  but  not  as 
taking  active  part  in  the  battle  itself,  though,  with  the 
prelate's  pugnacious  propensities,  it  is  almost  im- 


26  THE  CONQUEROK  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

possible  to  believe  lie  could  withstand  the  temptation. 
"  The  Sire  de  Moubrai/'  however,  mentioned  as  a 
combatant  by  the  Norman  poet,  was  Roger  de  Moubrai, 
brother  of  the  Bishop,  and  father  of  Robert  de  Mowbray, 
Earl  of  Northumberland. 

Montbrai  (Moubrai)  is  a  commune  in  the  canton  of 
Percy,  arrondissement  of  St.  L6.  Its  name  was  cor- 
rupted in  England  into  Mowbray,  which,  after  its 
assumption  by  the  family  of  Albini,  I  need  scarcely 
observe,  became  one  of  the  noblest  in  England. 

Bishop  Geoffrey  appears  to  have  preferred  the 
name  of  St.  L6  to  that  of  Montbrai,  and  we  find  him 
therefore  described  as  De  Sancto  Laudo  and  St. 
Loth. 

The  first  time  we  hear  of  him  after  the  battle  is  at 
the  coronation  of  William  in  Westminster  Abbey, 
when,  "  at  the  instigation  of  the  Devil,"  says  the  pious 
Orderic,  an  unforeseen  occurrence,  pregnant  with  mis- 
chief to  both  nations  and  an  omen  of  future  calamities, 
suddenly  occurred.  For  when  Aldred,  the  Archbishop, 
demanded  of  the  English,  and  Geoffrey,  Bishop  of 
Coutances,  of  the  Normans,  whether  they  consented  to 
have  William  for  their  King,  and  the  whole  assembly 
with  one  voice,  though  not  in  one  language,  shouted 
assent,  the  men-at-arms  on  guard  outside  the  Abbey, 
hearing  the  joyful  acclamations  of  the  people  within  in 


GEOFFREY,  BISHOP  OF  COUTANCES.  2T 

a  language  they  did  not  understand,  suspected  some 
treachery,  and  rashly  set  fire  to  the  neighbouring 
houses. 

The  flames  spreading,  the  congregation,  seized  with 
a  panic,  rushed  to  the  doors  in  order  to  make  their 
escape,  and  a  scene  of  the  utmost  confusion  ensued, 
during  which  the  ceremony  of  the  coronation  was  with 
difficulty  completed  by  the  trembling  clergy,  the  mighty 
Conqueror  himself  being  seriously  alarmed,  not  so 
much  for  his  life  as  for  the  evil  effects  of  this  untoward 
event  upon  his  new  subjects. 

In  1069,  when  the  West  Saxons  of  Dorset  and 
Somerset  made  an  attack  on  Montacute,  Bishop 
Geoffrey,  at  the  head  of  the  men  of  London,  Win- 
chester, and  Salisbury,  fell  upon  them  by  surprise  and 
routed  them,  putting  many  to  the  sword  and  miserably 
mutilating  the  prisoners. 

In  1071  he  was  appointed  to  represent  the  King  at 
the  trial  of  Bishop  Odo,  on  the  complaint  of  the  Arch- 
bishop of  Canterbury,  as  already  mentioned ;  and  three 
years  later  we  find  him  again  in  arms  beside  that  same 
Odo,  marching  to  suppress  the  rebellion  of  the  Earls 
of  Hereford  and  Norfolk,  and  for  these  and  other  ser- 
vices he  was  rewarded  by  the  Conqueror  with  "  two 
hundred  and  eighty  vills,  which  are  commonly  called 
manors." 


28  THE   COXQUEEOB  AND   HIS  COMPANIONS. 

An  assistant  at  the  coronation  of  the  Conqueror,  he 
was  an  attendant  at  his  funeral,  and  died  on  the  2nd 
of  February,  1093-4,  leaving  his  large  domains  in 
England  to  his  nephew,  Robert,  Earl  of  Northumberland, 
son  of  his  brother,  Roger  de  Moubrai,  who  fought  at 
Senlac,  but  of  whom,  strange  to  say,  there  appears 
no  trace  whatever  of  any  benefit  accruing  to  him 
for  his  services  in  that  important  action.  His  son, 
Robert  de  Mowbray,  Earl  of  Northumberland,  having 
joined  in  the  conspiracy  against  William  Rufus  in 
1095,  was  taken  prisoner,  and  languished,  we  are 
told,  thirty  years  in  a  dungeon  at  Windsor.  Orderic 
describes  him  as  distinguished  for  his  great  power  and 
wealth,  his  bold  spirit  and  military  daring  causing 
him  to  hold  his  fellow  nobles  in  contempt,  and  being 
inflated  with  empty  pride,  he  disdained  obedience  to 
his  superiors.  In  person  he  was  of  great  stature, 
size,  and  strength,  of  a  dark  complexion,  and  covered 
with  hair.  He  was  bold,  but  at  the  same  time 
crafty.  His  features  were  melancholy  and  harsh. 
He  reflected  more  than  he  talked,  and  scarcely  ever 
smiled  when  he  was  speaking. 

It  does  not  appear  clearly  by  whom  Robert  de 
Mowbray  was  made  Earl  of  Northumberland. 

After  the  beheading  of  Waltheof, — one  of  the  worst 
of  the  many  infamoui  acts  of  William  the  Conqueror, 


GEOFFREY,  BISHOP  OF  COUTAJtfCES.  29 

— in  1075,  the  government  of  the  province  appears  to 
have  been  confided  to  Walcher,  Bishop  of  Durham, 
who  was  murdered  during  a  popular  commotion  in 
1070.  The  earldom  was  then,  it  would  seem,  con- 
ferred on  one  Alberic,  a  Norman  by  birth,  of  whom 
a  strange  story  is  told.  Being  a  person  of  great 
authority,  and  not  satisfied  with  his  own  condition,  he 
consulted  the  Devil,  and  was  told  that  he  should  pos- 
sess Greece.  Whereupon  he  made  a  voyage  into  that 
country ;  but  when  the  Greeks  understood  that  his 
object  was  to  reign  over  them,  they  despoiled  him  of 
all  that  he  had  with  him,  and  expelled  him  the  realm. 
Wearied  with  travel  he  returned  to  Normandy,  where 
King  Henry  gave  him  a  noble  widow  in  marriage,  and 
the  priest  at  the  altar  asking  the  woman,  whose  name 
was  Gracza,  "Wilt  thou  have  this  man ?"  the  bride- 
groom was  suddenly  made  aware  of  the  illusion  of  the 
Evil  one, — 

"  Keeping  the  word  of  promise  to  the  ear 
To  break  it  to  the  hope." 

If  there  be  any  truth  in  the  fact  of  the  marriage  in 
the  reign  of  Henry  I.,  apart  from  the  legendary 
portion  of  the  story,  how  could  Robert  de  Mowbray  be 
Earl  of  Northumberland  in  the  time  of  William  the 
Conqueror,  or  even  of  his  son  Piufus  ? 

As  late  as  1088  (1st  of  Rufus),  Geoffrey,  Bishop  of 


30  THE  CONQUEROR  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

Coutances,  witnesses  the  charter  of  foundation  of  St. 
Mary's  at  York  as  Governor  of  the  earldom :  "  Eo 
tempore  Northymbrorum  Consulatum  reyebat" — an 
office  which  we  have  seen  stated  to  have  been  held  by 
Walcher,  Bishop  of  Durham,  after  the  judicial  murder 
of  Waltheof,  and  previous  to  the  gift  of  the  earldom 
to  Alberic.  The  latter  may  have  either  resigned  or 
forfeited  the  earldom  when  he  left  England  on  his 
Grecian  expedition,  and  Bishop  Geoffrey  held  the 
government  of  the  county  until  his  death  in  1093, 
when  his  nephew  Robert,  succeeding  to  all  his  vast 
estates,  was  probably  advanced  to  the  dignity  of  Earl 
of  Northumberland  by  Rums.  At  any  rate,  I  have 
not  been  able  to  arrive  at  any  nearer  approach  to 
the  fact. 

The  wife  of  this  Robert  was  Matilda,  daughter  of 
Richer  de  1'Aigle,  by  his  wife  Judith,  sister  of  Hugh, 
Earl  of  Chester.  Orderic  informs  us  that  their  union 
took  place  only  three  months  before  his  insurrection, 
and  that  she  was  therefore  early  deprived  of  her 
husband,  and  long  exposed  to  deep  suffering,  as  during 
his  life  she  could  not,  according  to  the  law  of  God, 
marry  again.  At  length  by  licence  of  Pope  Paschal, 
before  whom  the  case  was  laid  by  learned  persons, 
after  a  long  period  Nigel  de  Albini  took  her  to  wife. 
Of  her  treatment  by  him  we  shall  discourse  hereafter. 


GEOFFREY,   BISHOP  OF  COUTANCES.  31 

I  have  only  mentioned  the  iact  here  as  affecting  the 
date  of  the  dissolution  of  the  marriage,  Paschal  II. 
having  succeeded  to  the  chair  of  St.  Peter,  15th  June. 
1099,  and  dying  21st  June,  1118. 

Orderic  Vital  says  in  his  7th  Book,  that  Robert 
de  Mowbray  was  detained  in  captivity  by  Rufus  and 
his  brother  Henry  for  nearly  thirty-four  years,  living 
to  an  advanced  age,  without  having  any  children.  In 
his  8th  Book,  he  reduces  the  term  to  thirty  years, 
adding  that  "  he  grew  old  while  paying  the  penalty  of 
his  crimes."  Admitting  the  shortest  period,  his  death 
could  not  have  occurred  before  1125.  Dugdale,  who 
gives  the  earliei*.  date  of  1106,  with  the  addition 
of  the  statement  of  his  being  shorn  a  monk  at  St. 
Albans,  takes  not  the  slightest  notice  of  these  contra- 
dictions. His  reference  is  to  Vincent's  "  Discoverie  of 
Brooke's  Errors;"  but  if  it  be  an  error  of  Brooke,  who 
quotes  no  authority  for  his  statement,  Vincent  has  not 
corrected  him,  which  he  would  have  been  too  happy 
to  do  had  it  been  in  his  power.  The  difference 
between  eleven  years  and  thirty,  or  four-and-thirty,  is 
rather  an  important  one ;  but  I  have  been  unable  as  yet 
to  light  upon  any  fact  which  would  decide  the  question, 
which  is  only  important  in  this  inquiry  as  bearing 
upon  another — was  he  old  enough  in  1066  to  be 
present  at  Hastings  with  his  father  Roger,  "  the  Sire 


32          THE  GONQUEEOE  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

de  Molbrai  "  of  Wace,  and  therefore  entitled  to  be 
included  amongst  the  companions  of  the  Conqueror  ? 
If  so,  he  must  have  been  close  upon  fifty  at  the  time 
of  his  marriage,  and,  according  to  Ordcric,  an  octoge- 
narian at  that  of  his  death. 


CHAPTER  II. 


RICHARD    DE    BIENFA1TE. 
BALDWIN    DE    MEULES. 
RICHARD    DE    REDVERS. 


GILBERT  DE  MONTFICHET. 
ROGER    LE    BIGOD. 


RICHARD  DE  BIENFAITE. 

THIS  great  progenitor  of  the  illustrious  house  of 
Clare,  of  the  Barons  Fitzwalter,  and  the  Earls  of 
Gloucester  and  Hertford,  was  the  son  of  Gilbert,  sur- 
named  Crispin,  Comte  d'Eu  and  Brionne,  grandson  of 
Richard  L,  Duke  of  Normandy.  Count  Gilbert  was 
one  of  the  guardians  of  the  young  Duke  William,  and 
was  murdered  by  assassins  employed  by  Raoul  de 
Gace*,  as  already  related  in  the  memoir  of  the  Con- 
queror (vol.  i.,  p.  16).  Orderic  gives  us  the  name 
of  one  of  the  assassins — Robert  de  Vitot ;  and  Guil- 
laume  de  Jumie'ges  tells  us  that  two  of  the  family  of 
Giroie  fell  upon  and  murdered  him  when  he  was 
peaceably  riding  near  Eschafour,  expecting  no  evil. 
This  appears  to  have  been  an  act  of  vengeance  for 
wrongs  inflicted  upon  the  orphan  children  of  Giroie 


VOL.  II. 


34  THE  CONQUEROR  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

by  Gilbert,  and  it  is  not  clear  what  Raoul  de  Gace  had 
to  do  in  the  business. 

Fearing  they  might  meet  their  father's  fate,  Richard 
and  his  brother  Baldwin  were  conveyed  by  their 
friends  to  the  court  of  Baldwin,  Count  of  Flanders. 

On  the  marriage  of  Matilda  of  Flanders  to  Duke 
William  in  1053,  the  latter,  at  the  request  of  the 
Count,  restored  to  the  two  sons  of  Gilbert  the  fiefs 
which  in  their  absence  he  had  seized  and  appro- 
priated, Richard  receiving  those  of  Bienfaite  and 
Orbec,  from  the  first  of  which,  latinized  Benefacta,  he 
derived  one  of  the  various  names  whereby  he  is 
designated  and  the  reader  of  history  mystified. 

By  Wace,  who  includes  him  among  the  combatants 
in  the  great  battle,  he  is  called 

"  Dam  Richart  ki  tient  Orbec ;  " 

and  the  exchange  of  Brionne  for  Tunbridge,  in  the 
county  of  Kent,  obtained  for  him  the  appellation  of 
Richard  of  Tunbridge.  At  the  same  time  the  gift 
of  the  honour  of  Clare  in  Suffolk  added  a  fourth 
name  to  the  list,  which  is  swelled  by  a  fifth,  descriptive 
of  his  parentage,  viz.,  Richard  Fitz  Gilbert. 

It  is  necessary  for  a  reader  to  be  acquainted  with 
all  these  particulars,  in  order  to  identify  the  individual 
he  meets  with  under  so  many  aliases. 


BICHAKD  DE  BIENFAITE.  35 

In  the  exchange  of  the  properties  above  mentioned 
a  most  primitive  mode  of  insuring  their  equal  value 
was  resorted  to.  A  league  was  measured  with  a  rope 
round  the  Castle  of  Brionne,  and  the  same  rope  being 
brought  over  to  England,  was  employed  in  meting 
out  a  league  round  Tunbridge ;  so  that  exactly  the 
same  number  of  miles  was  allotted  to  the  latter  estate 
as  the  former  had  been  found  to  contain.*  Besides 
Tunbridge,  Richard  possessed  at  the  time  of  the  com- 
pilation of  Domesday  one  hundred  and  eighty-eight 
manors  and  burgages,  thirty-five  being  in  Essex  and 
ninety-five  in  Suffolk. 

He  was  associated  with  William  de  Warren  as 
High  Justiciaries  of  England  during  the  King's  visit 
to  Normandy  in  1067,  and  actively  assisted  in  the 
suppression  of  the  revolt  of  the  Earls  of  Hereford  and 
Norfolk. 

Dugdale  and  others  have  confounded  this  Richard 
Fitz  Gilbert  or  de  Clare  with  his  grandson  of  the  same 
name,  who  was  waylaid  and  killed  by  the  Welsh 
chieftains,  Jo  worth  and  his  brother  Morgan-ap-Owen, 
in  a  woody  tract  called  "the  ill- way  of  Coed  Grano," 
near  the  Abbey  of  Lanthony,  in  1135.f  Richard,  the 
son  of  Gilbert  Crispin,  would  at  that  date  have  been 

*  Continuator  of  Guillaume  de  Jumieges. 

t  Florence  of  Worcester,  Henry  of  Huntingdon,  Welsh  Chronicle, 
sub  anno,  Giraldus  Cambrensis,  cap.  yi. 

D  2 


36          THE  CONQUEEOE  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

nearly,  if  not  quite,  a  hundred  years  old,  and  the 
Richard  slain  in  "  the  Wood  of  Revenge,"  as  it  is. 
still  called  to  this  day,  was  the  second  son  of  the 
Gilbert  who  was  lord  of  Tunbridge  at  the  beginning 
of  the  reign  of  Rufus,  and  joined  in  the  rebellion  of 
Odo,  Bishop  of  Bayeux,  against  that  monarch  in  1088. 
(Vide  vol.  i.,  page  97.)*' 

The  pedigree  of  this  family  is  one  of  the  most  con- 
fused in  Dugdale's  "  Baronage/'  and  has  been  the 
subject  of  some  very  severe  comments  by  Mr.  Hornby, 
who,  while  conferring  great  obligations  upon  us  by  his 
correction  of  the  errors  into  which  Dugdale  has  fallen, 
forgot  those  we  are  under  to  the  learned  and  laborious 
herald  for  the  mass  of  information  collected  and  ren- 
dered accessible  to  us  by  his  research  and  industry, 
and  which  he  made  doubly  valuable  by  faithfully 
indicating  the  innumerable  sources  whence  it  was 
derived,  enabling  us  to  test  the  accuracy  of  his 
quotations  and  the  credibility  of  the  evidence.  For- 
tunately, my  present  task  is  limited  to  the  life  of 
Richard  de  Bienfaite,  which  must  have  terminated 
either  before  or  very  early  in  the  reign  of  Rufus,  as 


*  This  later  Eichard  Fitz  Gilbert  is  the  one  who  was  taken  prisoner 
by  Eobert  de  Belesme  at  the  siege  of  Courci  in  1091,  and  said  to  have 
died  eventually  from  the  effects  of  his  incarceration  (Ord.  Vit.,  lib. 
viii.,  cap.  16),  which  it  is  clear  he  did  not. 


EICHARD  DE  BIEXFAITE.  37 

his    son  Gilbert  was  in  possession  of  Tunbridge  in 
1088. 

The  continued  alternation  of  the  names  of  Richard 
and  Gilbert  in  this  particular  line  of  Clare  tends 
greatly  to  confuse  the  genealogist,  and  nothing  but  a 
rigid  verification  of  dates  can  preserve  us  from  the 
most  inexplicable  entanglements.  Not  only  has  Dug- 
dale  reversed  the  order  of  events,  but  ascribed  the 
same  acts  to  both  father  and  son,  and  recorded  the 
same  fate  to  Richard  and  his  grandson.  There  is  a 
curious  indication  of  the  probable  date  of  the  death  of 
Richard  de  Bienfaite  in  the  long,  rambling,  and  ridi- 
culous story  of  an  adventure  which  occurred  to  a 
priest  named  "NValkelin,  afterwards  known  as  St. 
Aubin,  Bishop  of  Angers,  and  who  in  1091  resided  at 
Bonne val,  in  the  diocese  of  Lisieux.  At  the  commence- 
ment of  the  month  of  January  in  that  year,  having  been 
summoned  in  the  middle  of  the  night  to  visit  a  sick 
man  who  lived  at  the  further  extremity  of  the  parish, 
he  was  alarmed  on  his  road  homewards  by  what 
sounded  like  the  tramp  of  a  considerable  body  of 
soldiers,  and  thought  it  was  part  of  the  forces  of  Robert 
de  Belesme  on  their  march  to  lay  siege  to  the  Castle 
of  Courci.  Considering  it  prudent  to  avoid  them,  he 
made  for  a  group  of  medlar  trees  at  some  distance 
from  the  road,  with  the  intention  of  concealing  himself 


38  THE  OONQTJEEOE  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 


behind  them  till  the  troops  had  passed ;  but  he  was 
suddenly  confronted  by  a  man  of  enormous  stature, 
wielding  a  massive  club,  who  shouted  to  him,  "  Stand! 
Take  not  a  step  further ! "  The  priest,  frozen  with 
terror,  remained  motionless,  leaning  on  his  staff.  The 
gigantic  club-bearer  stood  close  beside  him,  and  with- 
out offering  to  do  him  any  injury,  awaited  silently  the 
passage  of  the  troops.  The  moon,  we  are  assured,  shed 
a  resplendent  light,  and  speedily  there  appeared  an 
apparently  interminable  procession  of  deceased  persons 
of  both  sexes  and  all  classes,  amongst  whom  the 
priest  recognised  many  of  his  neighbours  who  had 
lately  died,  and  heard  them  bewailing  the  excruciating 
torments  they  were  suffering  for  the  evil  they  had 
done  in  their  time.  There  were  also  ladies  of  high 
rank,  and,  mirabile  didu,  bishops,  abbots,  and  monks, 
many  of  whom  were  considered  saints  on  earth,  all 
groaning  and  wailing,  and  these  were  followed  by  a 
mighty  host  of  warriors,  fully  armed,  on  great  war- 
horses,  and  carrying  black  banners.  There  were  seen, 
says  the  narrator,  Richard  and  Baldwin,  sons  of  Count 
Gilbert,  wlio  were  lately  dead,  and  amongst  the  rest 
Landri  of  Orbec,  who  was  killed  the  same  year  ; 
William  de  Glos,  son  of  Barno,  the  steward  of  William 
de  Breteuil  and  of  his  father,  William,  Earl  of  Here- 
ford ;  and  Robert,  son  of  Ralph  le  Blond,  the  priest's 


EICHARD  DE  BIENFAITE.  39 

own  brother,  with  whom  he  had  a  long  conversation 
on  family  matters. . 

I  will  spare  the  reader  the  more  preposterous  details 
of  this  absurd  story  and  the  sermons  with  which  it  is 
interlarded,  merely  observing  that  Orderic,  who  relates 
it,  assures  us  that  he  heard  it  from  the  priest's  own 
mouth,  and  saw  the  mark  on  his  face  which  was  left 
by  the  fiery  hand  of  one  of  the  terrible  knights.  We 
have,  therefore,  incidental  evidence  of  one  fact 
recorded  in  it,  the  death  of  Richard  de  Bienfaite 
and  his  brother  Baldwin,  before  January,  1091,  or, 
according  to  our  present  calculation,  1090,  for  Orderic 
sometimes  begins  his  year  at  Christmas,  and  at  others 
at  Easter. 

The  wife  of  Richard  de  Bienfaite,  Lord  of  Tunbridge 
and  Clare,  was  Rohesia,  the  only  daughter  of  Walter 
Giffard,  the  first  Earl  of  Buckingham,  and  by  her  he 
had  six  sons,  Godfrey,  Robert  (from  whom  the  Barons 
Fitz  Walter),  Richard,  a  monk  at  Bee,  Walter  and 
Roger,  who  both  died  without  issue,  and  Gilbert,  who 
succeeded  him,  and  became  the  direct  progenitor  of  the 
great  Earl  of  Hertford  and  Gloucester.  He  had  also 
two  daughters,  Rohesia,  wife  of  Eudo  Dapifer,  and 
another  unnamed,  who  married  Ralph  de  Telgers. 

The  fact  that  the  first  Fitz  Walter  was  the  great- 
grandson  of  Richard  de  Bienfaite  is  sufficient  to  prove 


40  THE  CONQUEEOR  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

that  his  (Fitz  Walter's)  name  was  subsequently  intro- 
duced into  the  Roll  of  Battle  Abbey. 

BALDWIN  DE  MEULES. 

This  younger  brother  of  Richard  de  Bienfaite  is  not 
distinctly  mentioned  in  the  "  Roman  de  Rou  "  in  the 
list  of  the  Norman  knights  at  Hastings;  but  M.  le 
Prevost  considers  him  to  have  been  the  personage 
spoken  of  as 

"  Oil  ki  fu  Sire  cle  Eeviers." 

Notwithstanding  that,  he  contends  the  first  who 
assumed  the  name  of  Reviers  was  Richard,  the  son 
of  this  Baldwin,  who  in  1082  witnessed  a  charter  to 
the  Abbaye  aux  Dames,  in  which  I  believe  him  to  be 
mistaken. 

Wace  so  constantly  leaves  us  to  discover  who  was 
the  "  sire  "  of  the  fief  he  mentions  at  the  date  of  the 
Conquest,  and  confounds  the  son  with  the  father,  that 
M.  le  Provost  may  be  excused  for  his  belief  could  he 
prove  that  Richard  Fitz  Baldwin  was  ever  called 
"  De  Reviers,"  a  vill  near  Creulli,  arrondissement  of 
Caen,  from  which  the  family  of  Rivers  derived  their 
name. 

Richard,  indeed,  could  not  have  been  in  the  battle, 
as  he  was  living1  seventy  years  afterwards,  and  could 
scarcely  have  been  born  in  1066. 


BALDWIN  DE  MEULES.  41 

No  special  deeds  are,  however,  recorded  of  the  Sire 
de  Keviers  in  that  memorable  conflict.  He  is  only 
said  to  have"  brought  with  him  many  knights,  who 
were  foremost  in  the  fight,  and  trampled  down  the 
English  with  their  powerful  war-horses. 

Whatever  were  the  services  of  Baldwin,  he  was  re- 
warded by  the  gift  of  one  hundred  and  sixty-four  manors 
in  the  west  of  England,  one  hundred  and  fifty-nine 
being  in  the  county  of  .Devon,  besides  nineteen  houses  in 
Exeter,  and  a  site  within  the  walls  to  build  a  castle  on 
for  his  own  residence,  the  government  of  the  city  and 
the  shrievalty  of  the  county  being  confided  to  him. 
He  is  therefore  called  Baldwin  the  Viscount,  or  the 
Sheriff,  and  Baldwin  of  Exeter,  in  addition  to  his 
Norman  appellations,  Baldwin  de  Sap,  Baldwin  de 
Meules,  or,  as  it  is  latinised,  de  Molis  (the  two  estates 
which  were  restored  to  him  by  Duke  William  at  the 
same  time  that  his  brother  Richard  received  Bienfaite 
and  Orbec),  and  his  patronymic  Baldwin  Fitz  Gilbert 
de  Brionne,  or  sometimes  simply  Baldwin  de  Brionne. 

Under  each  of  these  names  he  will  be  met  with  in 
different  chronicles  and  histories,  to  the  bewilderment 
of  the  readers  unversed  in  Norman  genealogy. 

By  his  wife  Albreda,*  who  is  said  to  have  been  a 

*  Dugdalo  oddly  enough  describes  her  as  "  niece  to  King  William, 
viz.,  daughter  of  his  aunt."  Whichever  she  might  be,  she  could  not  be 
both. 


42  THE  COXQUEBOB  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

daughter  of  an  aunt  of  the  Conqueror,  and  by  some 
his  niece,  lie  had  issue  three  sons,  Richard,  Robert, 
and  William,  the  second  of  whom  in  1090  was 
intrusted  with  the  custody  of  the  Castle  of  Brionne, 
and  on  being  commanded  by  the  Duke  of  Normandy 
to  deliver  it  up  to  Roger  de  Beaumont,  to  whom 
for  a  great  sum  of  money  Court-heuse  had  promised 
it,  in  his  answer  obliged  us  with  the  following 
pedigree : — 

"  If,"  he  is  reported  to  have  said,  "  you  will  retain 
it  in  your  own  hands,  as  your  father  did,  I  will  imme- 
diately render  it  to  you,  otherwise  I  will  keep  it  as 
my  own  inheritance  as  long  as  I  live.  For  it  is  very 
well  known  to  all  the  inhabitants  of  this  country  that 
old  Richard,  Duke  of  Normandy,  gave  it  with  the  whole 
country  to  Godfrey,  his  son,  and  that  he  at  his  death 
left  it  to  Gilbert,  his  son,  who,  being  barbarously 
murdered  by  wicked  men,  his  sons  for  refuge  fled  to 
Baldwin,  Count  of  Flanders  ;  whereupon  your  father 
(William  the  Conqueror),  taking  it  wholly  into  his  own 
hands,  disposed  thereof  to  several  persons  as  he  thought 
good  ;  but  after  a  while,  having  wedded  the  daughter  of 
the  said  Count  of  Flanders,  at  the  request  of  that 
Count,  he  rendered  to  Baldwin,  my  father,  Mola  and 
Sappo  (Meules  and  Sap),  and  gave  him  his  aunt's 
daughter  to  wife ;  and  to  Richard,  my  father's  brother, 


BALDWIN  DE  MEULES.  43 

he  restored  Benefact  (Bienfaite)  and  Orbec,  and 
lastly  by  your  special  favour  I  do  now  enjoy  this 
Brionne,  the  principal  town  of  Gilbert,  iny  grandfather.'"' 
If  any  dependence  is  to  be  placed  on  this  passage  in 
Orderic,  it  is  clear  that  Robert  de  Meules  must  have 
known  that  his  father's  wife  was  the  cousin  of  the 
Conqueror,  and  that  his  father  was  then  dead,  which 
corroborates  the  statement  of  the  priest  Walkelin,  that 
Richard  and  Baldwin,  sons  of  Count  Gilbert,  were 
recentlv  deceased  in  1090  or  1091.  Baldwin  is  said  to 

»' 

have  had  also  three  daughters,  one  of  whom,  named 
Adeliza,  wife  of  Ralph  Avenel,  alone  survived  him,  and 
a  natural  son  named  Guiger,  who  was  shorn  a  monk  in 
the  Abbey  of  Bee.  But  who  was  his  wife  Albreda, 
said  to  have  been  a  niece  of  Richard  II.,  Duke  of 
Normandy  ?  and  who  was  Emma,  another  wife  of 
Baldwin,  twice  mentioned  by  William,  both  as 
Duke  of  Normandy  in  1066,  and  as  King  of 
England  in  1082,  in  his  charter  to  the  Holy  Trinity 
at  Caen,  and  by  which  of  them  was  his  issue? 
For,  be  it  remarked,  that  Robert,  in  his  address  to 
Court-heuse,  though  he  speaks  of  his  father  having 
married  a  cousin  of  the  Conqueror,  does  not  call  her 
his  mother,  nor  by  naming  her  enable  us  to  identify 
her  either  as  Albreda  or  Emma. 

In  Domesday,  "the  wife  of  Baldwin  the  Sheriff"  is 


44          THE  CONdUEEOE  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

returned  as  the  holder  of  Wimple,  in  Devon,  but 
unfortunately  no  Christian  name  is  recorded.  Pere 
Anselm  gives  Baldwin  two  wives — 1,  Albreda,  and  2, 
Emma ;  and  suggests  that  the  former  was  the  child  of 
an  illegitimate  daughter  of  Richard  II.,  Duke  of  Nor- 
mandy, wife  of  Manger,  Vicomte  of  the  Cotentin,  and 
quotes  a  charter  of  hers  by  which,  with  the  consent  of 
her  sons  Richard  and  Robert,  she  gives  to  the  Abbey 
of  Bee  the  land  of  Bradeforde  and  the  Church  of 
St.  Michael  d'Ermentonne.0  As  the  first  wife  of 
Baldwin  this  evidence  is  conclusive  as  regards  Richard 
and  Robert  at  any  rate  being  the  issue  of  Albreda. 
By  his  second  wife  Emma,  with  whose  consent  he 
gave  the  Churches  of  La  Forest  and  two  hundred 
acres  of  land  in  the  same  place  to  the  Abbey  of  the 
Holy  Trinity  at  Caen,  he  may  have  had  the  two 
youngest  daughters,  as  one  appears  to  have  been 
named  Emma,  and  married  Hugues  de  Wast. 

And  now  to  return  to  the  question  of  who  was  "  le 
Sire  de  Reviers  "  at  Senlac,  if  Baldwin  were  not  he. 
That  he  had  a  son  Richard  is  indisputable ;  but  that 
son,  known  only  as  Richard  Fitz  Baldwin  and  Richard 
the  Viscount,  having  succeeded  his  father  in  the 
shrievalty  of  Devonshire  and  the  barony  of  Oke- 


*  In  M.  de  Magny's  list  we  have  Badouin  and  fioycr  de  Meules. 
"Who  was  Roger  ? 


RICHARD  DE  REDVERS.  45 

hampton,  died  in  1137  without  issue,  and  being  first 
buried  at  Brightly,  was  subsequently  removed  by  his 
sister  Adeliza,  his  sole  heiress,  to  Ford  Abbey  ;  and 
there  is  no  authority  for  his  having  ever  been  called 
De  Redvers  or  De  Reviers. 

Dugdale,  in  his  "Baronage"  (vol.  i.,  p.  785),  has, 
however,  confounded  him  with  one  who  was  well 
known  by  that  title — 

RICHARD  DE  REDVERS, 

who  died  in  1107  (thirty  years  before  Richard  Fitz 
Baldwin),  and  was  buried  at  Monteburgh,  an  abbey  in 
Normandy,  of  which  he  appears  to  have  been  one  of 
the  earliest  benefactors,  if  not  the  founder,  by  per- 
mission of  William  the  Conqueror,  in  1080.  The  top 
of  his  stone  coffin  was  preserved  from  destruction  by 
M.  de  Gerville,  and  the  epithet  "  Fundator "  was 
said  to  have  been  then  visible  upon  it. 

But  I  am  burying  the  man  before  I  have  brought 
him  into  existence !  Let  us  try,  therefore,  to  discover 
his  parentage,  as  it  is  quite  clear  he  was  not  the  son 
of  Baldwin  de  Meules  and  Albreda,  as  till  recently  he 
has  been  recorded. 

The  late  Mr.  Stapleton,  in  his  Addenda  to  the  second 
volume  of  his  "  Illustrations  of  the  Norman  Rolls  of  the 


46          THE  CONQUEKOK  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

Exchequer,"  appears  to  assert  (for  I  confess  I  cannot 
clearly  understand  the  passage)  that  he  was  the  son  of 
a  William  de  Redvers ;  but  unfortunately  does  not 
print  the  charter  on  which  he  seems  to  found  his 
opinion.  In  the  grant  of  Lodres,  in  Dorsetshire,  to  the 
Abbey  of  Monteburgh,  Richard  de  Redvers  certainly 
gives  "  also  the  land  which  William  de  Redvers  had 
in  Monteburgh  "  (Gallia  Christiana,  vol.  xi.),  but  he 
does  not  call  him  his  father,  or  allude  in  any  way  to 
his  relationship.  In  another  charter  printed  by 
Mr.  Stapleton,  he  speaks  of  his  father  and  mother,  but 
without  naming  them. 

In  the  cartulary  of  Carisbrook  he  is  called  the 
nephew  of  William  Fitz  Osbern,  and  the  grant  of 
the  Isle  of  Wight  to  him  after  the  death  of  Roger  de 
Breteuil,  Earl  of  Hereford,  certainly  gives  some  sup- 
port to  the  assertion.  William  Fitz  Osbern  had  at 
least  one  other  daughter  besides  the  unfortunate 
Countess  of  Norfolk,  of  whom  we  learn  no  more 
than  that  she  became  the  mother  of  Raynold  de 
Cracci.  Her  daughter  may  have  been  the  wife  of 
Richard  de  Redvers,  which  would  justify  the  expres- 
sion "  nepos,"  used  indifferently  for  nephew  or  grand- 
son. 

The  continuator  of  Guillaume  de  Jumie'ges  tells 
us  that  one  of  Gunnora's  nieces  married  Osmund  de 


EICHAED  DE  EEDVEES.  47 

Centumville  (i.  e.  Cotenville),  Vicomte  de  Vernon,  and 
had  by  him  Fulk  de  Aneio  (a  companion  of  the 
Conqueror  of  whom  I  shall  have  to  speak)  and  several 
daughters,  one  of  whom  was  the  mother  of  the  first 
Baldwin  de  Redvers :  "  qua  mm  mater  fuit  primi 
Baldwini  de  Revers  "  (cap.  xxxvii.).  Some  have  con- 
sidered this  to  apply  to  Baldwin  de  Brionne  or  de 
Meules,  and  others  to  the  first  Baldwin  de  Redvers, 
Earl  of  Devon,  but  the  foundation  charter  to  Monte- 
burgh  appears  to  me  to  solve  this  riddle.  Richard  de 
Redvers  (the  founder)  signs  before  Earl  Simon  and 
Earl  Eustace,  and  following  their  signatures  were  those 
of  "  Baldwin,  son  of  Richard  de  Redvers,"  and  of 
Willermi  (William)  brother  of  the  same  Baldwin. 
Here  we  have  a  Baldwin  de  Redvers  and  a  William 
his  brother,  giving  credibility  to  the  assertion  that  their 
grandfather  might  have  been  a  William  de  Redvers, 
according  to  Mr.  Stapleton.*  At  the  same  time 
it  is  probable  that  he  was  the  first  Baldwin  de 
Redvers,  and  father  of  the  Richard  who  was  "  the 
Sire  de  Reviers  "  at  Hastings,  and  died  in  1107,  having 
been  one  of  the  principal  counsellors  and  champions  of 
Prince  Henry  in  his  conflicts  with  his  brother,  Robert 
Court-heuse,  and  who  shortly  after  his  accession  to  the 
throne  in  1100,  rewarded  his  friend's  service  by  the 
*  In  both  the  French  lists  we  find  a  "William  as  well  as  a  Richard. 


48  THE  CONQUEROR  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

gift  of  Tiverton  and  Plympton,   and  the  third  penny 
of  the  pleas  of  the  county  of  Devon. 

Mr.  Stapleton  in  his  "  Addenda,"  above  mentioned, 
denies  that  this  Richard  de  Redvers  was  ever  Earl  of 
Devon  ;  but  if  it  be  true  that  he  had  the  third  penny 
of  the  pleas,  the  gift  of  tertinm  denarium  would  carry 
with  it  the  earldom,  though  the  ceremony  of  girding 
with  the  sword  (generally  supposed  not  to  have  been 
practised  before  the  reign  of  John)  might  not  have 
been  performed. 

The  argument  that  we  do  not  find  him  styled  Earl 
in  contemporary  documents  is  of  no  great  value,  as 
such  omission  is  common  in  ancient  charters ;  but  that 
his  wife  Adeliza  thought  him  an  earl  is  clear  from  her 
charter  to  Twinham,  in  which  she  gives  to  the 
Church  of  the  Holy  Trinity  her  Church  of  Thorlei  for 
the  health  of  the  souls  of  her  Lord  Richard,  Earl  of 
Redvers,  and  of  her  son,  Earl  Baldwin ;  the  grant 
being  made  with  the  consent  of  "  Earl  Richard ; 
my  grandson  and  heir."  Here  you  will  observe 
that  she  styles  her  husband,  her  son,  and  her 
grandson  all  earls,  but  not  of  Devon,  though  the  two 
latter  were  so  beyond  question.  Therefore  the  omis- 
sion cannot  be  used  as  an  argument  against  the  first. 

This  Lady  Adeliza  was  a  daughter  of  William 
Peverel  of  Nottingham  and  his  wife  Adelina  of  Lan- 


GILBERT  DE  MONTFICHET.  49 

caster,  and  her  family  by  Richard  de  Redvers  consisted 
of  three  sons,  Baldwin,  Earl  of  Devon,  William,  sur- 
named  De  Vernon,  and  Robert  of  St.  Mary  Church, 
and  one  daughter,  Hawisia,  wife  of  William  de  Rou- 
inare,  Earl  of  Lincoln.  Baldwin  and  William  must 
both  have  been  very  young  at  the  time  they  witnessed 
the  charter  to  Monteburgh,  as  the  former  did  not  die 
till  1155.  His  mother  survived  him,  but  how  long  is 
not  certain.  She  was  dead  before  1165,  and  must,  if 
these  dates  can  be  relied  on,  have  been  nearly  a 
centenarian.  But  for  the  precise  information  contained 
in  her  charter  to  Twinham,  I  should  be  inclined  to 
believe  with  Dr.  Oliver  that  a  generation  had  been 
omitted  in  the  pedigree. 

GILBERT  DE  MONTFICHET. 

This  Norman  lord  of  a  commune  situated  on  the 
road  from  St.  L6  to  Bayeux,  and  where  as  late  as 
1827  might  be  seen  a  few  ruins  of  the  castle  which 
was  the  original  stronghold  of  the  family,  is,  according 
to  Monsieur  le  Prevost,  "  one  of  the  most  authentic 
personages  who  can  be  named  as  having  assisted  at 
the  battle  of  Hastings."  (Note  to  "  Le  Roman  de  Rou," 
vol.  ii.,  p.  256.)  But  we  hear  of  him  then  for  the 
first  time,  and  simply  as  "le  Sire  de  Monfichet,n 
without  any  exploit  having  been  recorded  of  him. 

TOL.  II.  I 


50  THE  CONQUEROR  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

What  is  our  astonishment,  then,  on  consulting  Dug- 
dale,  to  learn,  on  the  authority  of  an  ancient  history  of 
the  family,*  that  the  said  Gilbert  de  Montfichet  (Mont- 
fiquet)  was  a  Roman  by  birth,  descended  from  an  old 
illustrious  Roman  family  (De  Montefixio  ?)  ;  that  he  was 
in  the  habit  of  dispensing  palatial  hospitality  to  all  royal 
visitors  to  the  Papal  Court,  and  specially  entertaining 
William,  Duke  of  Normandy,  whenever  he  set  foot  in 
the  sacred  city ;  and  that  he  was  a  kinsman  of  the 
Duke,  and  privy  to  all  his  councils,  especially  to  that 
design  of  King  Edward  the  Confessor  to  make  him 
his  successor  to  the  realm  of  England. 

How  is  it  that  in  no  contemporary  historian  can 
we  find  a  trace  of  the  Count,  Marquis,  or  Duke  of  the 
Normans,  as  William  is  indifferently  styled,  having 
•ever  crossed  the  Alps,  or  extended  his  travels  further 
than  France,  England,  and  Flanders  ?  As  a  boy  he 
was  at  Paris ;  as  a  man,  at  Poissy.  In  1051  he  was  in 
England,  arid  it  is  believed  in  1066  in  Flanders ;  but 
at  what  other  time  had  he  a  day,  I  might  almost  say 
an  hour,  the  occupation  of  which  is  not  accounted  for, 
rendering  a  journey  to  Rome  in  the  interim  an  actual 
impossibility  ?  What  can  have  been  the  origin  of  this 
extraordinary  story  ?  How  could  Dugdale  have  copied 
this  account  without  a  comment?  Is  the  whole 

•  Mon.  Aug.,  vol.  ii.  p.  236. 


GILBERT  DE  MONTFICHET.  51 

romance  the  concoction  of  David  the  Priest,  a  Scot 
by  birth,  whom  Gilbert  so  loved  that  he  gave  to  him 
a  place  called  Tremhale,  in  the  county  of  Essex, 
whereon  to  build  a  church  and  other  monastic  edifices, 
viz.,  the  Priory  of  Tremhale,  of  which  this  ancient  MS. 
would  seem  to  have  been  one  of  the  muniments ;  and 
if  so,  how  much  are  we  to  believe  of  it  ? 

Utterly  incredulous  of  the  statement  that  he 
(Gilbert)  entertained  that  Duke  in  his  house  when- 
ever he  came  to  Rome — which  implies  more  than 
one  visit  to  the  Eternal  City — what  faith  are  we 
to  attach  to  the  description  of  Gilbert's  Italian 
extraction,  and  of  his  kinsmanship  to  the  Conqueror? 
AVas  he  named  after  his  property  in  the  Roman  States, 
and  did  he  impart  it  to  or  derive  it  from  this  land  in 
Normandy  acquired  by  gift  or  marriage?  Nothing 
has  yet  been  discovered  to  elucidate  the  subject.  We 
are  ignorant  of  whom  he  married  or  when  he  died ; 
the  aforesaid  history  merely  informing  us  that,  after 
the  gift  of  Tremhale  to  the  priest  David,  he  returned 
to.  Rome,  leaving  what  he  had  obtained  in  England  by 
his  services  to  the  Conqueror  at  the  battle  of  Hastings 
and  afterwards,  to  his  son  Richard,  who,  on  arriving  at 
man's  estate,  travelled  to  Rome,  and  being  a  person 
of  extraordinary  strength  obtained  much  fame  in 
casting  a  stone,  no  man  being  able  to  do  the  like,  in 

E  2 


52  THE  CONQUEROR  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

memory  whereof  certain  pillars  of  brass  were  set  up 
to  mark  the  distance. 

What  is  nearly  as  singular  as  this  story  is  the  fact 
that  the  large  possessions  Gilbert  is  reported  to  have 
obtained  in  reward  for  his  services  are  not  to  be  found 
in  Domesday,  and  that  it  is  not  till  we  come  to  a 
William  Montfichet,  apparently  a  grandson  or  great 
nephew  of  Gilbert  the  Roman,  and  the  husband  of 
Margaret  de  Clare,  daughter  of  Gilbert  Fitz  Richard 
of  Timbridge,  that  we  find  mention  of  any  possessions 
in  England  whatever. 

Monsieur  le  Prerost  asserts  so  positively  that  there 
can  be  no  question  but  that  Gilbert  was  the  Sire  de 
Montfichet  mentioned  by  Wace  amongst  the  com- 
batants at  Senlac,  that  he  must  doubtlessly  have 
found  authority  sufficient  to  justify  his  doing  so.  I 
should  otherwise  be  inclined  to  consider  the  companion 
of  the  Conqueror  was  a  William  de  Montfichet,  father 
or  uncle  of  the  William  above  named,  who  had  a  wife 
named  Rohais,  and  was  certainly  a  contemporary  of 
the  Conqueror,  as  in  his  reign  he  granted  to  the  monks 
of  Croisy  in  Normandy  the  Church  of  St.  Marculf, 
with  the  tithes  thereto  belonging,  and  one  plough 
land ;  also  the  Church  of  Fontenis  and  its  tithes,  with 
certain  lands  in  Sotaville ;  likewise  two  salt  works, 
with  two  boats  for  great  fish;  the  right  use  of  every 


GILBERT  DE  MONTFICHET.  53 

great  fish,  with  one,  piece,  of  the,  small,  and  two  islands 
lying  in  the  sea.  Surely  at  the  time  of  this  grant  he 
must  have  been  the  Lord  of  Montfichet,  but  whether 
a  brother  or  a  son  of  Gilbert  we  are  at  present  without 
means  of  even  surmising. 

Dugdale  has,  I  think,  confounded  him  with  his  son 
or  nephew,  the  second  William,  who  was  certainly  the 
founder  of  the  fortunes  of  the  family  in  England,. most 
probably  by  his  marriage  with  a  daughter  of  the  great 
house  of  Clare,  with  whose  consent,  and  that  of  his 
son  and  heir,  Gilbert,  he  founded  in  1135  (35th 
Henry  I.)  the  Abbey  of  Stratford  Langton,  in 
Essex,  within  the  precincts  of  his  lordship  of  West- 
ham.  It  was,  I  presume,  in  commemoration  of  this 
alliance  that  his  descendants  assumed  the  arms  of 
Clare,  unless,  as  some  have  suggested,  they  were 
themselves  a  branch  of  that  great  family,  a  conjec- 
ture the  names  of  Gilbert  and  Richard  certainly  tend 
to  support,  as  well  as  the  tradition  of  their  being  kins- 
men of  the  Conqueror,  but  which  would  be  fatal  to 
the  story  of  the  descent  from  an  illustrious  race  of 
Romans. 

The  male  line  of  William  and  Margaret  de  Clare 
terminated  in  their  great-grandson  Richard,  Sheriff  of 
the  county  of  Essex,  Governor  of  the  Castle  of  Hert- 
ford, and  Justice  of  the  King's  Forests  in  no  less  than 


54          THE  CONQUEEOB  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

fifteen  English  counties.  His  name  descends  to  us 
with  the  town  of  Stansted-Montfichet,  the  seat  of  his 
barony  in  the  reign  of  Henry  III.  Adelina,  the  second 
of  his  three  sisters  and  coheirs,  married  William  de 
Fortibus  (second  of  that  name),  Earl  of  Albemarle, 
whose  granddaughter  Adelina,  having  first  married 
Ingleram  de  Percy,  became  the  wife  of  Edmund,  sur- 
named  Crouchback,  Earl  of  Lancaster,  second  son  of 
King  Henry  III.,  but  died  without  adding  to  the  royal 
family  of  England. 


ROGEK  LE  EIGOD. 

The  owner  of  this  great  historical  name,  who  accom- 
panied the  Conqueror  to  England,  was  apparently  the 
son  of  Robert  le  Bigod,  the  first  of  the  name  of  whom 
we  have  any  notice,  and  who  was  a  witness  to  the 
foundation  of  St.  Philibert-sur-Risle,  in  1066.  Wace, 
in  his  enumeration  of  the  leaders  in  the  host  at 
Hastings,  designates  the  member  of  this  family  simply 
as  the  ancestor  of  Hugh  le  Bigot,  Lord  of  Maletot, 
Loges,  and  Canon. 

"  L'Anccstre  Hue  le  Bigot 
Ki  avoit  terre  a  Maletot, 
Etais  Loges  et  a  Chanon." 

Roman  de  Ron,  1.  1-377. 

Maletot  is  near  Caen,  Canon  (Chanon)  is  in  the  arron- 


ROGER  LE  BIGOD.  55 

dissement  of  Lisieux,  .and  Loges  may  have  been  either 
Les  Loges,  near  Aunay,  or  another  commune  of  the 
same  name  in  the  neighbourhood  of  Falaise.* 

The  possession  of  these  lands  in  Normandy  by  "  the 
ancestor  of  Hugh  le  Bigot "  is  a  curious  fact,  taken 
into  consideration  with  the  account  the  monk  of 
Jumieges  gives  of  this  ancestor.  Robert  le  Bigod,  he 
tells  us,  was  a  knight  in  the  service  of  William  Werlenc, 
or  the  Warling,  Comte  de  Mortain,  and  so  poor  that 
he  prayed  his  lord  to  permit  him  to  go  and  seek  his 
fortune  in  Apulia,  where  his  countrymen  were  estab- 
lishing themselves  and  acquiring  wealth  and  dignity 
under  the  leadership  of  Robert  Guiscard.  The  Count 
bade  him  remain,  assuring  him  that  within  eighty  days 
he  (Robert)  would  be  in  a  position  to  help  himself  to 
whatever  he  'desired  in  Normandy. 

Whether  the  Count  contemplated  the  deposition  of 
Duke  William,  or  was  privy  to  the  design  of  others, 
may  never  be  known,  but  Robert  le  Bigod,  inferring 
from  this  advice  that  some  rebellious  movement  was 
projected,  repaired  to  Richard  Goz,  Vicomte  of  the 
Hiemois,  who  was  at  that  moment  highly  in  favour 
with  the  Duke,  and  requested  him  to  obtain  an  audience 
for  him.  Richard,  who,  according  to  the  same  authority, 
was  a  kinsman  of  Robert — it  would  be  interesting  to 

*  Le  Preyost :  Notes  to  Le  Rom.  de  Rou,  TO!,  ii.,  p.  256. 


56          THE  CONQUEROR  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

learn  how — readily  complied,  and  Le  Bigod  having 
repeated  to  the  Duke  the  words  of  the  Warling,  the 
latter  was  instantly  summoned  to  attend  him,  accused 
of  treason,  banished  the  country,  and  the  Comte*  of 
Mortain  was  bestowed  upon  the  Duke's  half-brother 
Robert,  the  son  of  Herleve  by  Herluin.  That  William 
jumped  at  this  opportunity  to  rid  himself  of  a  possible 
competitor  whose  claim  to  the  duchy  was  clearly 
stronger  than  his  own,  and  at  the  same  time  to  advance 
one  of  his  own  family  who  would  have  no  such  pre- 
tensions, there  can  be  no  doubt.  The  truth  or  false- 
hood of  the  story  told  to  him  by  Kobert  le  Bigod  has 
never  been  established.  The  defence  of  the  accused, 
if  he  made  any,  has  not  been  recorded ;  and  even 
Mr.  Freeman  admits  that  the  Duke's  "justice,  if  justice 
it  was,  fell  so  sharply  and  speedily  as  to  look  very  like 
interested  oppression."  *  We  have  seen  in  the  previous 
notice  of  Eaoul  de  Gael  what  opinion  was  held  in  his 
own  days  of  this  suspicious  act  of  the  Conqueror.  From 
that  moment  Kobert  le  Bigod  became  a  confidential 
servant  of  his  sovereign,  and  his  sou  Koger  was  the 
companion  of  the  Conqueror,  who  for  his  services  at 
Senlac  received  large  grants  of  land  in  the  counties  of 
Essex  and  Suffolk,  six  lordships  in  the  former  and  one 
hundred  and  seventeen  in  the  latter. 

*  Norm.  Conq.,  vol.  ii.,  p.  290. 


EOGEE  LE  BIGOD.  57 


MODS,  le  Prevost  remarks  that  Wace,  always  in- 
clined to  treat  tlie  present  as  the  past,  has  attributed 
to  Roger  the  office  of  seneschal,  which  was  only 
enjoyed  by  his  second  son  William.  With  all  de- 
ference, I  think  the  learned  antiquary  has  misunder- 
stood his  author.  Wace  is  not  speaking  of  Roger  le 
Bigod,  the  father  of  Hugh  and  William,  but  of  "  the 
ancestor  of  Hugh,"  Robert,  as  I  take  it,  "  who  served 
the  Duke  in  his  house  as  one  of  his  seneschals,  which 
office  he  held  in  fee." 

Mr.  Taylor  remarks  that  there  is  no  authority  for 
this  statement,  yet  we  find  that  Roger,  who  was  one 
of  the  privy  councillors  and  treasurer  of  the  Duke, 
was  seneschal  or  steward  to  Henry  I.,  after  the  decease 
of  his  father,  and  that  both  William  and  Hugh,  his 
sons,  succeeded  each  other  in  that  high  office,  which  is 
a  fair  corroboration  of  the  assertion  that  it  was  held  in 
fee.  If  Wace  be  in  error  it  is  in  his  intimation,  as  I 
understand  him,  that  it  was  Hugh's  grandfather 
Robert,  and  not  his  father,  Roger,  who  accompanied 
Duke  William  to  Hastings. 

As  we  have  no  means  at  present  of  ascertaining  the 
age  of  Robert  when  he  accused  his  lord  of  treason,  it 
is  not  improbable  that  he,  as  well  as  his  son  Roger, 
was  at  Senlac.  The  latter  survived  the  Conquest 
forty-three  years,  and  may  have  been  a  young  man  in 


58  THE  CONQUEROK  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

1066,  and  his  father  not  too  old  to  bestride  a  war 
steed  and  lead  his  retainers  into  action.  Whether 
father  or  son,  we  are  told  that  "  he  had  a  large  troop, 
and  was  a  noble  vassal.  He  was  small  of  body,  but 
very  brave  and  daring,  and  assaulted  the  English  with 
his  mace  gallantly."  (Roman  de  Rou,  1.  13,682-87.) 
We  hear  nothing  of  him  during  the  reign  of  the  first 
William,  but  at  the  commencement  of  that  of  the 
second,  Eoger  le  Bigod  is  found  amongst  the  adherents 
of  Eobert  Court-heuse,  fortifying  his  castle  at  Norwich 
and  laying  waste  the  country  round  about :  whether 
eventually  reconciled  to  Rufus,  or  what  was  the  result 
of  the  suppressed  rebellion  to  him  personally,  we  are 
without  information;  but  in  the  first  year  of  the  reign 
of  Henry  I.,  being  one  of  those  who  stood  firm  to  the 
King,  he  had  Framlingham,  in  Suffolk,  of  his  gift. 

In  1103,  by  the  advice  of  King  Henry,  Maud  the 
Queen,  Hubert  Bishop  of  Norwich,  and  his  own  wife, 
the  Lady  Adeliza,  one  of  the  daughters  and  co-heirs 
of  Hugh  de  Grentmesnil,  seneschal  of  England,  he 
founded  the  Abbey  of  Thetford,  in  the  county  of 
Norfolk,  and,  dying  in  1107,  was  buried  there. 

By  the  Lady  Adeliza  he  is  said  to  have  had  seven 
children — William,  his  son  and  heir,  who  by  his 
charter,  confirming  his  father's  gift  to  Thetford,  informs 
us  that  he  was  "  Dapifer  regis  Anglorum  ;'"  2.  Hugh 


EOGEE  LE  BIGOD.  59 

le  Bigod,  the  first  earl ;  3.  Richard  ;  4.  Geoffrey  ;  5. 
John  j  6.  Maud,  wife  of  William  de  Albini  Pincema ; 
and  7.  Gunnora,  who  married,  first,  Robert  of  Essex, 
and,  secondly,  Hamo  de  Clare.  William  perished  in 
the  fatal  wreck  of  the  White  Ship,  and  Hugh,  his 
brother  and  heir,  in  his  turn  steward  of  the  King's 
household,  was  eventually  created  Earl  of  Norfolk; 
his  descendants,  by  a  match  with  Maud,  the  eldest 
daughter  and  co-heiress  of  the  Marshals,  Earls  of 
Pembroke,  becoming  marshals  of  England,  an  office 
enjoyed  to  this  day  by  the  Dukes  of  Norfolk. 

The  name  and  origin  of  this  family,  Mr.  Taylor 
remarks,  seem  more  worthy  of  consideration  than  has 
hitherto  been  given  to  it.*  The  name  is  spelt  in- 
differently Bigod,  Bigot,  Bihot,  Vigot,  Wigot,  Wihot, 
and  Wigelot,  generally  with  the  prefix  of  "  le."  The 
Normans  are  represented  by  the  French  to  be  "  Bigoz 
and  Drauchiers ;  "  the  latter  term  is  understood  to 
mean  consumers  of  barley — perhaps  beer-drinkers — 
and  the  former  presumed  to  have  been  given  them 
from  their  constantly  taking  the  name  of  the  Almighty 
in  vain.  Anderson,  in  his  "  Genealogical  Tables," 
says,  without  quoting  his  authority,  that  Rollo  was 
styled  "  Bygot,"  from  his  frequent  use  of  the  phrase. 
This  derivation  receives  some  support  from  the  well 

*  Notes  to  Rom.  de  Eou,  p.  235. 


60          THE  CONQUEKOE  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

known  story  of  the  altercation  between  Edward  I.  and 
Roger  le  Bigod,  Earl  of  Norfolk,  nephew  of  the  former 
Roger,  which  is  recorded  unfortunately  in  Latin  by 
Walter  of  Hemingford,  and  is  therefore  deprived  of  its 
otherwise  singularly  illustrative  application,  which,  if 
the  words  were  spoken  in  English,  would  be  of  some 
weight  in  the  argument. 

In  answer  to  the  King's  declaration,  "By  God, 
Earl,  you  shall  either  go  or  hang!"  the  undaunted 
baron  replied,  "  By  the  same  oath,  0  King,  I  will 
neither  go  nor  hang  !  "  The  "  per  Deum  "  and  the 
"  per  idem  juramentum  "  of  the  chronicler  leaves  us  in 
uncertainty  whether  or  not  a  play  on  the  words  was 
intended  by  either  speaker. 

I  have  a  theory  of  my  own,  which  I  by  no  means 
insist  upon,  but  only  offer  for  the  consideration  of  those 
most  competent  to  investigate  the  subject.  The  prefix 
"  le  "  distinctly  points  out  that  the  name  is  not  derived 
from  a  possession  or  a  place  of  birth.  It  is  either  a 
personal  or  a  general  designation.  Personal  it  cannot 
be  in  this  case,  as  it  is  applied  to  the  whole  nation, 
and  we  are  therefore  driven  to  the  conclusion  that  it 
either  alluded  to  a  national  habit  or  a  national  origin. 

The  former  is  the  received  opinion,  as  stated  above  ; 
but  it  has  to  be  shown  that  the  purely  Teutonic  words, 
"  Bei  Gott"  were  used  in  common  parlance  by  the 


EOGER  LE  BIGOD.  61 

Normans.  We  find  their  war-cry  was  "  Dex  aie,"  and 
"  par  Die ;  "  "  par  Dieu  "  is  to  this  day  so  constantly 
in  the  mouth  of  a  Frenchman  that  he  could  scarcely 
disparage  a  foreigner  for  an  equally  common  breach  of 
the  third  commandment  in  any  language. 

I  am  inclined  to  believe  the  Normans  were  consi- 
dered by  the  French  as  a  race  of  Goths  (as  indeed 
they  were) — a  barbarous  people,  such  as  even  now  we 
should  describe  as  "Goths  and  Vandals;"  and  the 
south  of  France  having  been  subdued  and  occupied  by 
them  for  nearly  five  centuries  by  that  branch  of  the 
great  Sythic  family,  distinguished  as  the  West  Goths  or 
Visigoths,  the  latter  appellation  being  more  familiar  to 
the  French  may  have  been  corrupted  into  Vigot  and 
Bigot,  from  which  source  I  would  also  derive  the  well- 
known  Norman  name  of  Wigod. 

The  example  I  have  already  given  of  similar  cor- 
ruptions in  the  name  of  Raoul  de  Gael  (p.  10,  ante)  will, 
I  think,  justify  me  in  suggesting,  on  these  grounds, 
that  the  family  of  Le  Bigod  was  of  Visigothic  origin, 
and,  as  in  the  case  of  Baldric  the  German,  or  Robert 
the  Frison,  had  assumed  or  been  designated  by  the 
name  of  their  race  and  country,  of  which  they  were 
proud,  notwithstanding  the  sense  wherein  it  was  ap- 
plied by  the  French  to  the  Normans  generally.  We 
have  "le  Angevin,"  "  le  Fleming,"  "  le  Breton,"  "le 


62  THE  CONQUEROR  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

Poiteviri,"  "  le  Scot,"  &c.,  and  in  tins  category  I  think 
we  may  class  "  le  Vigot,"  an  abbreviation  of  "  le 
Visigot,"  spelt,  as  we  find  it,  indifferently  with  a  "  B  " 
or  a  "  W"  (Bigot  and  Wigot),  according  to  the  parti- 
cular dialect  of  the  writers.  The  application  of  the 
name  to  the  Normans  generally,  while  it  proves  that  it 
was  not  derived  from  any  hereditary  possession  or 
personal  peculiarity,  as  in  other  cases,  also  testifies 
to  the  purity  of  the  family,  which  was  distinguished 
amongst  its  own  people  by  the  designation  of  that  great 
Gothic  stock  whence  they  commonly  proceeded. 

A  signet  ring  was  dug  up  some  few  years  ago  on 
one  of  the  estates  in  Norfolk  which  had  belonged  to 
this  family,  exhibiting  the  figure  of  a  goat,  with  the 
word  "  By  "  above  it,  being  a  punning  device  or  rebus 
"  By  Goat."  It  is  engraved  in  Mr.  Taylor's  translation 
of  the  "  Roman  de  Rou  "  (p.  235,  note),  but  of  the  legend 
round  it  the  word  "God"  is  alone  distinguishable. 
This,  however,  is  merely  a  mediaeval  curiosity  of  no 
importance  to  the  question  of  derivation.  To  settle 
that  question  we  must  "  learn  to  labour  and  to  wait." 


CHAPTER    III. 


HUMPHREY   DE   BOHUK 
HEXRY   DE   FERRERS. 
GEOFFREY  DE  MANDEVILLE. 


HUGH    DE   GRENTMESN1L. 
RICHARD   DE   COURCI. 


HUMPHREY  DE  BOHUN. 

"  De  Bohun  le  Vieil  Onfrei." 

Roman  de  Ron,  1.  13,583. 

WACE  appears  to  be  specially  addicted  to  represent 
the  companions  of  the  Conqueror  as  venerable  from 
age  as  renowned  for  their  valour.  Humphrey  "  with 
the  beard,"  however,  who  is  the  De  Bohun  he  is  here 
commemorating,  may,  with  some  propriety,  be  styled 
"  the  old,"  as  there  is  evidence  that  previous  to  the 
Conquest  he  had  been  thrice  married ;  his  grant  to 
the  nuns  of  St.  Amand  at  Rouen  of  a  tithe  of  his  own 
plough  and  a  garden,  being  made  for  the  health  of 
his  soul  and  the  souls  of  his  three  wives,  not  one  of 
whom  unfortunately  is  named,  but  it  is  witnessed  by 
"  William  Comes,"  as  the  Duke  of  Normandy  was 
often  termed  prior  to  his  elevation  to  the  throne  of 


64  THE  CONQTJEROK  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

England,  the  titles  of  Count  and  Duke  being  indif- 
ferently used  by  him  and  by  his  predecessors. 

The  practice  of  close  shaving  amongst  the  Nor- 
mans, and  which  caused  the  spies  of  Harold  to  report 
that  the  invading  army  was  an  army  of  priests,  is 
further  illustrated  by  such  distinctions  as  "  with  the 
beard,"  and  "  with  the  whiskers,"  being  employed  to 
identify  particular  members  of  a  family.  Several 
examples  of  this  practice  have  already  been  noticed. 

Of  the  origin  of  the  De  Bohuns  very  little  has  yet 
been  discovered.  We  are  vaguely  informed  that  the 
first  of  this  name  known  to  us,  the  aforesaid  Hum- 
phrey with  the  beard,  was  a  near  kinsman  of  the 
Conqueror,  but  in  what  particular  degree,  or  by  which 
of  the  many  branches,  legitimate  and  illegitimate,  of 
the  ducal  house  of  Normandy,  no  information  is 
afforded  us.  After  the  Conquest  he  became  possessed 
of  the  lordship  of  Talesford,  in  the  county  of  Norfolk, 
so  that  whatever  his  relationship  to  or  support  of 
William  may  have  been,  no  very  great  benefit  appears 
to  have  resulted  from  it. 

Bohun,  or  rather  Bohon,  the  place  whence  the 
family  derived  its  name,  is  situated  in  the  arrondisse- 
ment  of  St.  L6,  in  the  Cotentin,  where  are  still  the 
communes  of  St.  Andre*  and  St.  George  de  Bohon. 
The  mound  of  the  castle  was  visible  some  thirty  years 


HUMPHREY  DE  BOHUN.  65 

ago,  and  may  be  still.  The  honour  of  Bohon  was  in 
possession  of  this  Humphrey  at  the  time  of  the 
Norman  invasion,  and  his  later  gift  of  the  Church  of 
St.  George  de  Bohon  as  a  cell  to  the  Abbey  of 
Marmoutier,  is  confirmed  by  William,  King  of  the 
English,  "  his  Queen  Mathildis,  his  sons  Robert  and 
William,  his  half-brother  Odo,  Bishop  of  Bayeux, 
Michael,  Bishop  of  Avranches,  Roger  de  Montgomeri, 
and  Richard,  son  of  Turstain,"  husband  of  Emma  de 
Conteville,  which  certainly  supports  the  belief  that  he 
was  closely  connected  with  the  Conqueror,  probably 
by  one  of  his  wives,  respecting  whose  parentage  we 
are  left  so  provokingly  in  the  dark. 

He  died  before  1113,  having  had  issue  three  sons 
and  two  daughters,  but  by  which  wife  or  wives  we  are 
unhappily  in  ignorance.  How  important,  genealogi- 
cally, to  the  descent  it  is  scarcely  necessary  to  observe. 
One  of  the  daughters  appears  to  me  to  have  been 
named  Adela  ;  at  least  I  find  an  Adela,  aunt  of  Hum- 
phrey de  Bohun,  in  the  Fine  Roll  for  Wiltshire,  31st  of 
1  Henry  L,  and  it  could  not  have  been  on  the  mother's 
side,  or  she  would  have  been  a  daughter  of  Edward 
of  Salisbury,  that  mysterious  personage,  one  of  whose 
daughters,  named  Maud  or  Mabel,  was  wife  of  Hum- 
phrey II.,  the  youngest  of  the  three  sons  of  "  old  Hum- 
phrey," and  the  founder  of  the  fortunes  of  the  family. 

VOL.  II.  F 


66  THE  CONQUEEOE  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

The  eldest  son,  Robert,  died,  in  his  father's  lifetime 
apparently,  unmarried  ;  and  from  Richard,  the  second 
son,  descended  in  the  female  line  the  Bohuns  of  Mid- 
hurst,  in  Sussex ;  but  the  grandeur  of  the  Bohuns 
was  due  to  the  extraordinary  succession  of  great 
matches  made  by  the  descendants  of  the  youngest 
sons,  who  became  Earls  of  Hereford,  Essex,  and 
Northampton,  the  co-heiresses  of  the  eleventh  and  last 
Humphrey  de  Bohun  being  the  wives,  one  of  Thomas 
of  Woodstock,  Earl  of  Gloucester,  and  son  of  King 
Edward  III.,  and  the  other  of  Henry,  surnamed 
Bolingbroke,  son  of  John  of  Gaunt,  Duke  of  Lan- 
caster, and  subsequently  ascending  the  throne  of 
England  as  King  Henry  IV. 

HENEY  DE  FEEEEES. 

"Henri  le  Sire  de  Terriers,"  commemorated  by 
Wace  as  a  combatant  at  Senlac,  was  Seigneur  de 

'  O 

Saint  Hilaire  de  Ferriers,  near  Bernay,  and  son  of 
Walkelin  de  Ferrers,  who  fell  in  a  contest  with  the 
first  Hugh  de  Montfort  we  hear  of  in  the  early  days 
of  Duke  William  II.,  and  therefore,  though  a  younger 
son,  for  he  had  an  elder  brother  named  Guillaume, 
who,  Monsieur  de  Pluquet  tells  us,  was  also  in  the 
great  battle,  must  have  been  well  advanced  in  years 
in  1066. 


HENRY  DE  FERRERS.  67 

Whatever  his  services,  it  was  not  till  after  Hugh 
d'Avranches  was  created  Earl  of  Chester,  in  10  71,  that 
Henry  de  Ferrers  received  at  least  the  Castle  of 
Tutbury,  his  "caput  Baronie,"  which  had  been  pre- 
viously granted  to  the  said  Hugh,  and  resigned  by 
him  on  becoming  Earl  of  Chester.  In  1085,  we 
find  him  appointed  one  of  the  commissioners 
for  the  general  survey  of  the  kingdom,  and  in 
that  year  he  is  recorded  as  the  holder,  besides  the 
Castle  of  Tutbury,  of  seven  lordships  in  Stafford- 
shire, twenty  in  Berkshire,  three  in  Wiltshire,  five  in 
Essex,  seven  in  Oxfordshire,  two  in  Lincolnshire,  two 
in  Buckinghamshire,  one  in  Gloucestershire,  two  in 
Herefordshire,  three  in  Hampshire,  thirty-five  in 
Leicestershire,  six  in  Warwickshire,  three  in  Notting- 
hamshire, and  one  hundred  and  fourteen  in  Derby- 
shire !  When  bestowed,  however,  or  how  obtained, 
whether  wholly  by  grant  of  the  King,  or  partly  by 
marriage,  is  not  recorded.  Neither  have  we  succeeded 
in  identifying  his  wife,  Berta,  in  conjunction  with 
whom  he  founded  and  richly  endowed  the  Priory  of 
Tutbury  in  1089,  "by  the  concession  and  authority  of 
William  the  younger  (Kufus),  King  of  the  English." 
The  date  of  his  death  also  is  unknown ;  but  he  had 
issue  three  sons,  Enguenulf,  William,  and  Robert.  The 
two  eldest  died  in  his  lifetime  without  issue,  and 

F    2 


68  THE  CONQUEEOK  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

Robert,  who  succeeded  him,  was  the  first  Earl  of 
Ferrers,  not  Earl  Ferrers,  as  incorrectly  described  by 
some,  but  "  Robertus,  Comes  de  Ferrarius "  or  "  de 
Ferriers,"  as  in  the  charter  of  the  second  Earl  Robert, 
who  was  also  Earl  of  Nottingham,  and  according  to 
Orderic  Vital,  the  first  Earl  of  Derby. 

It  is  no  part  of  the  plan  of  this  work  to  enter  into 
details  respecting  the  descendants  of  the  actual  com- 
panions of  the  Conqueror,  but  there  are  exceptions 
to  most,  if  not  to  all,  rules,  and  there  is  so  little  to  be 
said  about  Henry  de  Ferrers,  and  so  much  about  his 
immediate  successors,  that  I  am  tempted  to  depart 
from  my  own  rule  on  this  occasion. 

There  is  considerable  difference  of  opinion,  in  the 
absence  of  indubitable  facts,  as  to  which  of  these  two 
Roberts — father  and  son — distinguished  himself  in  the 
famous  battle  at  Northallerton,  known  as  the  Battle 
of  the  Standard,  also  as  to  the  exact  period  at  which 
the  earldoms  of  Nottingham  and  Derby  were  conferred 
upon  an  Earl  of  Ferrers;  but  the  principal  bone  of  con- 
tention is  the  identification  of  the  fortunate  member 
of  that  family  who  married  Margaret,  daughter  and 
heiress  of  William  Pevercl,  Lord  of  Nottingham,  who 
was  dispossessed  of  his  estates  by  King  Henry  II.,  for 
conspiring  with  Maud,  Countess  of  Chester,  to  poison 
her  husband,  Ranulph  Gernoiis,  Earl  of  Chester,  in  1 155. 


IIEXKY  DE  FEERERS.  69 

Now  this  is  a  very  curious  story,  which  has  been 
received  in  perfect  confidence,  and  handed  down  from 
writer  to  writer,  as  a  portion  of  the  history  of  Eng- 
land, until,  at  the  Newark  Congress  of  the  British 
Archaeological  Association,  I  ventured  to  question  the 
very  existence  even  of  the  Margaret  Peverel,  who  has 
been  married  by  various  genealogists  to  at  least  three 
.successive  Earls  of  Ferrers. 

In  the  charter  of  King  Stephen  to  the  monks  of 
Lanton  we  find  mention  of  this  William  Peverel,  of 
Jiis  wife  Oddona,  and  his  son  Henry,  at  that  time  most 
probably  his  heir  apparent ;  but  there  is  no  notice 
-of  any  daughter,  and  the  rolls  of  the  reign  of  Henry  I., 
Stephen,  and  Henry  II.,  in  which  mention  is  made 
•of  many  Peverels,  including  the  mother  and  sister  of 
William  Peverel  of  Nottingham,  are  equally  silent  on 
the  score  of  a  daughter,  and  acknowledge  no  Margaret 
Peverel  of  any  branch. 

Vincent  gives  Margaret  to  the  first  Earl  William, 
•who  tells  us  himself  that  his  wife's  name  was  Sibilla ; 
others  to  William's  father,  the  second  Eobert,  who 
-explicitly  declares  that  his  wife  was  another  Sibilla, 
daughter  of  William,  Lord  Braose  of  Bramber;  and 
my  dear  lamented  friend,  the  late  Rev.  C.  Hartshorne, 
in  the  "  Archaeological  Journal"  (vol.  v.,  p.  129),  calls 


70  THE   CONQUEKOK  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

Margaret  the  wife  of  the  fiist  Bobert,  who  married 
Ha  wise  de  Vitry. 

For  the  proof  that  "William  was  the  happy  man  we 
are  referred  to  the  Oblate  Eoll  of  the  1st  of  John,  in 
which  it  is  said  that  William,  the  third  earl  of  that 
name,  calls  Margaret  his  grandmother.  Now  here  is 
the  entry  referred  to,  in  which  you  will  find  no  such 
thing  : — "  The  Earl  of  Ferrers  gives  two  thousand 
marks  for  Hecham,  Blidsworth,  and  Newbottle,  that 
the  King  may  forego  all  claim  to  other  lands  which 
were  William  Pevercl's,  and  the  King  gives  to  him 
the  park  of  Hecham,  which  the  Lord  Henry,  his- 
great-grandfather  (that  is,  King  Henry  II.)  gave  in 
exchange  to  the  ancestors  of  William  Pcverel,"' 
Where  is  Margaret  ?  Where  any  mention  of  the 
grandmother  of  the  Earl  of  Ferrers  ? 

The  next  reference  is  to  a  plea-roll  of  the  25th 
of  Henry  HI.,  which  certainly  proves  that  some  Earl 
of  Ferrers  assumed  a  right  of  heirship  to  William 
Peverel,  but  by  no  means  hints  that  it  was  in  right 
of  his  wife,  or  makes  any  mention  of  Margaret.  The 
words  are  remarkable.  The  Earl  of  Ferrers  is  therein 
stated  to  have  made  himself  heir  of  the  aforesaid 
William  Peverel,  and  to  have  intruded  himself  into- 
the  same  inheritance  during  the  Avar  between  the 
King  and  his  barons.  Now,  we  are  told  that  one  of 


IIEXRY  DE  FEEREES. 


the  earliest  acts  of  Henry  II.  in  [the  year  after  his 
accession,  viz.,  1155,  was  to  disinherit  William  Peverel, 
the  staunch  supporter  of  his  old  rival  Stephen,  upon 
the  opportune  charge  of  poisoning  the  Earl  of  Chester, 
as  before  mentioned.  Henry  himself  does  not  charge 
him  specifically  with  it,  but  the  cause  is  distinctly 
stated  by  the  Chronicon  Roffense,  the  register  of  Dun- 
stable,  Matthew  Paris,  Matthew  of  Westminster,  and 
Gervase  of  Dover,  a  goodly  array  of  highly  respectable 
authorities. 

But  how  are  we  to  reconcile  this  statement  with  the 
fact  that  Henry,  before  he  ascended  the  throne,  most 
probably  at  the  time  of  the  pacification  with  Stephen 
in  1152,  and  certainly  not  later  than  1153,  in  which 
year  Earl  Ranulph  died,  gave  to  this  very  Ranulph  the 
man  Peverel  is  accused  of  poisoning,  with  other  large 
estates  of  hostile  nobles,  the  castle  and  town  of  Not- 
tingham, and  the  whole  fee  of  William  Peverel, 
wherever  it  was  (with  the  exception  of  Hecham)  unless 
he  (William  Peverel)  could  acquit  and  clear  himself  of 
his  wickedness  and  treason  ?  Are  we  not  justified  in 
believing,  upon  the  evidence  of  this  agreement — for 
such  is  the  nature  of  the  instrument,  which  is  wit- 
nessed by  parties  both  for  Henry  and  Ranulph, — that 
Peverel  was  dispossessed  of  his  estates,  not  for  assist- 
ing to  poison  the  Earl  of  Chester,  for  to  that  very 


72  THE  CONQUEEOB,  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

Earl  the  estates  are  given,  but  for  wickedness  and 
treason  generally — in  plain  words,  for  supporting 
Stephen  manfully  and  faithfully  against  Henry  and 
his  mother  \ 

Such  was  evidently  the  opinion  of  Sir  Peter 
Leycester,  who  printed  this  important  document  at 
length  in  his  "  Prolegomena/'  prefaced  with  these 
words,  "  How  Bandal  Earl  of  Chester  was  rewarded 
for  taking  part  with  Henry  Fitz-Empress,  being  yet 
but  Duke  of  Normandy  and  Earl  of  Anjou,  may 
appear  by  this  deed  following."  No  hint  of  its  being  a 
compensation  to  him  for  injury  inflicted  by  Peverel. 

And  what  was  the  punishment  of  the  Countess 
Maud,  the  supposed  accomplice  of  Peverel,  and  if  so, 
the  most  culpable  of  the  twain  ?  She  survived  the  Earl 
her  husband  many  years,  and  her  name  is  associated 
with  that  of  her  son,  Hugh  Kevilioc,  in  several  acts 
of  benevolence  and  piety,  amongst  them  actually  the 
purchase  of  absolution  for  her  husband,  who  died 
excommunicated. 

Hugh  Kevilioc,  who  succeeded  to  his  father's  earl- 
dom with  all  his  possessions,  had  a  daughter  named 
Agnes,  who  became  the  wife  of  William,  second  of 
that  name,  Earl  of  Ferrers  and  Derby,  and  thus  it  is 
clearly  evident  how  that  Earl  made  himself  heir  of 
Peverel  and  intruded  himself  into  that  inheritance, 


GEOFFEEY  DE  MANDEVILLE.  73 

having  purchased  Hecham  of  the  King,  which  had 
been  excepted  from  the  rest  of  the  fee  of  Peverel  in 
the  grant  of  Henry  Duke  of  Normandy  to  Ranulph 
Gernons,  and  claiming  heirship  to  the  estates  of 
Peverel,  in  right  of  his  wife  Agnes,  sister  and  co-heir 
of  Ranulph  Blondeville,  Earl  of  Chester,  the  grandson 
of  the  grantee,  and  not  through  any  marriage  with 
this  phantom  Margaret  Peverel,  no  trace  of  whom  has 
ever  been  found  in  one  authentic  document. 

The  reputed  victim  of  Peverel's  machinations  is  said 
by  King,  in  his  "  Vale  Royal,"  to  have  died  after 
lingering  in  agonies,  "  which  I  suspect  to  be  an  absurd 
translation  of  the  "  post  multos  agones "  of  Gervasc 
of  Dover.  His  words  arc,  "  post  multos  agones  mili- 
taris  glorise,"  and  the  context  proves  that  the  words 
do  not  apply  to  bodily  torture,  but  to  struggles  or 
contests  as  a  soldier  in  pursuit  of  military  glory. 
(Vide  Ducange  sub  agonia  and  agonizare.) 

What  conclusive  proof  have  we  that  Ranulph,  Earl 
of  Chester  died  of  poison  at  all  ?  "  Ut  fama  fuit "  is 
all  Gervase  of  Dover  can  say  about  it. 

GEOFFEEY  DE  MANDEVILLE. 

This  progenitor  of  one  of  the  noblest  and  most 
powerful  families  on  either  side  of  the  channel  is  simply 
alluded  to  by  Wace  as  "li  Sire  de  Maguevile"(l.  13,562). 


74     THE  CONQUEEOR  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

The  French  antiquaries,  whilst  agreeing  as  to  the 
individual  present  at  Hastings,  differ  respecting  the 
locality  whence  he  derived  his  name ;  Mons.  le 
Prevost  considering  it  to  be  Magneville,  near  Valonges, 
while  Mons.  Delisle  reports  that  it  was  Mandeville  le 
Trevieres,  the  Norman  estates  of  the  Magnavilles, 
Mandevilles,  or  Mannevilles,  as  they  were  indifferently 
called,  lying  partly  in  the  neighbourhood  of  Creulli, 
and  the  rest  round  Argentan,  where,  at  a  later  period, 
they  held  the  honour  of  Chamboi. 

No  particular  feat  of  arms  is  attributed  to  him  by 
the  Norman  poet.  He  is  only  mentioned  as  one  who 
rendered  great  aid  in  the  decisive  battle,  and  we  find 
him  in  consequence  rewarded  with  ample  domains  in 
England  at  the  time  of  the  great  survey,  amounting 
to  one  hundred  and  eighteen  lordships  in  various 
counties,  of  which  Walden,  in  Essex,  was  the  chief 
seat  of  his  descendants,  who  became  the  first  Norman 
earls  of  that  county  in  the  reign  of  Stephen. 

He  was  also  the  first  Constable  of  the  Tower  of 
London  after  the  Conquest,  an  office  enjoyed  by  his 
grandson  of  the  same  name,  which  I  mention  on 
account  of  the  interesting  fact  that,  in  the  charter 
of  the  Empress  Matilda,  which  confers  this  amongst 
many  other  honours  bestowed  upon  him,  the  custody 
of  the  Tower  of  London  is  granted  to  him  and  his 


HUGH  DE  GRENTMESNIL.  75 

heirs,  with  the  little  castle  there  (described  in  another 
charter  as  under  it)  which  belonged  to  Ravenger. 

This  charter  in  which  she  creates  Geoffrey  de  Man- 
deville  (grandson  of  the  companion  of  the  Conqueror) 
Earl  of  Essex,  is  stated  in  a  marginal  note  in  Dugdale's 
Baronage  to  be  "  the  most  ancient  creation  charter 

o 

which  hatli  been  ever  known/'  and,  I  may  add,  for 
the  numberless  concessions  and  privileges  recorded  in 
it,  the  most  remarkable. 

To  return  to  the  first  Geoffrey,  we  learn  from  his 
charter  of  foundation  of  the  Benedictine  Monastery  of 
Hurley,  in  Berkshire,  that  he  was  twice  married.  His 
first  wife  Athelaise  (Adeliza)  being  the  mother  of  his 
heir  William  de  Mandeville,  and  other  children  not 
named ;  and  his  second  wife,  Leceline,  by  whom  he 
appears  to  have  had  no  issue. 

Mr.  Stapleton,  in  his  annotations  to  the  Norman 
Eolls  of  the  Exchequer,  suggests  that  Adeliza,  the  first 
wife  of  Geoffrey,  was  sister  to  Anna,  wife  of  Turstain 
Haldub,  mother  of  Eudo  al  Chapel. 

HUGH  DE  GEENTMESNIL. 

Of  this  noble  Norman  we  have  considerable  infor- 
mation afforded  us  by  Orderic,  in  consequence  of  his 
being  one  of  the  founders  of  the  Abbey  of  Ouche, 
better  known  as  that  of  St.  Evroult,  in  which  the 


76  THE   CONQUEROR  AND   HIS  COMPANIONS. 

historian  was  professed  a  monk  by  the  venerable  Abbot 
Maiiier,  in  the  eleventh  year  of  his  age,  by  the  name  of 
Vitalis  (Vital),  and  in  which  monastery  he  lived  fifty- 
six  years. 

From  him  we  learn  that  Hugh  de  Grentmesnil  was 
one  of  the  sons  of  a  Robert  de  Grentmesnil  (now  known 
as  Grandmesnil,  in  the  arrondissement  of  Lisieux)  by 
Hawise  de  Giroie,  which  Robert  was  mortally  wounded 
in  the  battle  between  Roger  de  Toeni  and  Roger  de 
Beaumont,  already  mentioned,  vol.  i.,  pp.  19,  217. 

He  fought  on  the  side  of  De  Toeni,  and  being 
carried  off  the  field,  lingered  for  three  weeks,  and 
then  died  and  was  interred  without  the  Church 
of  St.  Mary  at  Norrei,  between  Grandmesnil  and 
Falaise.  His  issue  by  Hawise  de  Giroie  was  two 
sons,  Robert  and  Hugh,  between  whom  he  divided 
his  property. 

Robert  became  a  monk  in  the  abbey  he  had  assisted 
to  re-edify.  Hugh,  who  was  "  eminent  for  his  skill  and 
courage,"  was,  through  the  machinations  of  Mabel  de 
Montgomeri,  banished  by  Duke  William  without  any 
real  cause  of  offence  in  1058,  but  recalled  from  exile 
in  1063,  and  intrusted  with  the  custody  of  the  Castle 
of  Neufmarche-en-Lions,  from  which  the  Duke,  on 
equally  slight  grounds,  had  expelled  Geoffrey  de  Neuf- 
marche',  the  rightful  heir ;  and  nobly  forgetful  of  past 


HUGH  DE  GEENTMESNIL. 


injustice,  did  the  valiant  Hugh  justify  the  trust  reposed 
in  him,  restoring  in  the  course  of  a  year  the  disturbed 
district  to  perfect  tranquillity.  We  next  find  him 
amongst  the  principal  combatants  in  the  great  battle, 
but  he  surely  cannot  be  the  person  described  by  Wace 
as  "a  vassal  of  Grandmesnil,"  who  was  in  great  peril 
during  the  action  in  consequence  of  his  horse  becoming 
masterless  through  the  breaking  of  his  bridle-rein  in 
leaping  over  a  bush..  He  was  near  falling,  and  the 
English  perceiving  his  flight  ran  towards  him  with 
their  long  axes,  but  the  horse  taking  fright,  and  wheel- 
ing suddenly  round,  bore  his  rider  safely  back  into  the 
ranks  of  the  Normans.  Hugh  was  certainly  a  vassal 
of  the  Duke  of  Normandy,  but  a  baron  of  his  reputa- 
tion and  power  would  scarcely  be  so  described  by 
Wace.  Mons.  le  Prevost,  however,  appears  by  his  note 
on  the  passage  to  consider  it  refers  to  Hugh  himself, 
and  Mr.  Taylor  follows  him  without  comment.  It 
may  perhaps  be  argued  that  there  is  nothing  in  the 
incident  itself  to  give  it  sufficient  importance  to  be  re- 
corded by  the  poet  unless  the  person  endangered  was 
some  one  of  consequence.  At  all  events,  Hugh  de 
Grentmesnil  was  certainly  present  at  Senlac,  and  no 
doubt  did  his  devoir,  as  he  was  wont  to  do ;  for  in 
1067  we  find  him  one  of  the  principal  persons  joined 
with  William  Fitz  Osbern  and  Bishop  Odo  in  the 


78  THE  CONQUEROR  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

government  of  England  during  the  King's  absence  in 
Normandy,  and  besides  the  donation  of  one  hundred 
manors  in  this  country,  sixty-five  of  which  were  in 
Leicestershire,  he  was  appointed  Viscount  (i.e.,  sheriff) 
of  that  county  and  Governor  of  Hampshire. 

He  was  one  of  the  Norman  nobles  who  interceded 
with  the  Conqueror  in  favour  of  Eobert  Court-heuse, 
and  effected  a  temporary  reconciliation.  On  the 
accession  of  Eufus  he  espoused  the  cause  of  the 
young  duke  ;  but  like  many  others  of  his  rank  and 
country,  weary  of  his  vacillations,  and  disgusted  by 
his  general  conduct,  he  ultimately  took  part  against 
him. 

In  1090  we  find  him  in  Normandy,  in  his  old  age, 
strenuously  opposing  the  aggressions  of  the  detestable 
Kobert  de  Belesme,  who  had  erected  strongholds  at 
Fourches  and  at  La  Conebe,  on  the  river  Orme, 
whence  he  made  inroads  on  his  neighbours,  and 
harried  all  the  country  round. 

Hugh  de  Grentmesnil  and  Richard  de  Courci,  whose 
domains  lay  nearest  to  him,  and  most  exposed  to  his 
depredations,  were  the  first  to  take  arms  against  him. 
Both  these  knights  were  now  grey-headed,  but  their 
spirit  was  unbroken,  and  their  intimate  connection 
strengthened  the  bond  of  friendship  between  them, 
Richard  de  Courci,  the  son  of  Richard,  having  married 


HUGH  DE  GBENTMESNIL.  79 

Kohesia,  daughter  of  Hugh.  Matthew,  Count  of 
Beaumont-sur-rOise,  brother-in-law  of  Hugh,  William 
de  Warren,  second  Earl  of  Surrey,  with  many  other 
knights,  hastened  to  their  support,  eager  to  exhibit 
their  prowess  in  such  a  field.  Theobald,  son  of 
Walter  de  Breteuil,  called  "  the  White  Knight,"  because 
his  steed  and  appointments  were  all  white,  and  his 
brother-in-arms  Guy,  called  "  the  Ked  Knight  "  for  a 
similar  reason,  were  slain  in  some  of  these  encounters  ; 
but  Eobert  de  Belesme  finding  that  he  was  unable  to 
cope  alone  with  his  brave  and  resolute  opponents,  pre- 
vailed on  the  Duke  of  Normandy,  by  humble  supplica- 
tions and  specious  promises,  to  march  to  his  assistance. 
In  the  month  of  January,  1091,  the  Duke  accordingly 
laid  siege  to  Courci-sur-Dive  ;  but  unwilling  to  come 
to  extremities  with  his  great  nobles,  took  no  measures 
for  closely  investing  the  place.  De  Belesme,  however, 
used  every  means  by  force  and  stratagem  to  get  pos- 
session of  the  castle.  He  caused  a  huge  machine, 
called  a  belfry  (berfradum),  being  a  wooden  tower 
containing  a  number  of  stages  or  floors,  and  moving 
on  wheels,  to  be  constructed  and  rolled  up  to  the 
castle  walls,  filled  with  soldiers,  who  could  leap  from 
it  on  to  the  battlements,  or  fight  hand  to  hand  with 
the  defenders ;  but  the  device  proved  in  vain,  for  as 
often  as  he  attempted  an  assault,  a  powerful  force 


80  TIIE  CONQUEROR  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

from  Grentmesnil  hastened   to  the  rescue,  and  drew 
him  off  from  the  attack. 

In  one  of  these  conflicts  the  garrison  during  a  rally 
took  prisoners  William,  son  of  Henry  de  Ferrers 
(who  fought  at  Hastings),  and  William  de  Rupiere, 
whose  ransoms  were  a  great  assistance  to  the 
besieged ;  but,  on  the  other  hand,  the  besiegers  cap- 
tured Ivo,  one  of  the  sons  of  Hugh  de  Grentmesnil  and 
Richard  Fitz  Gilbert  de  Clare,  the  latter  of  whom  did 
not  lonoj  survive  the  horrors  of  the  dungeon  to  which 

O  O 

De  Belesrne  consigned  him. 

An  oven  had  been  built  outside  the  fortifications, 
between  the  castle  gate  and  De  Belesme's  belfry,  and 
there  the  baker  had  to  bake  the  bread  for  the  use  of 
the  garrison,  the  siege  having  been  begun  so  suddenly 
that  the  inhabitants  of  Courci  had  no  time  to  con- 
struct one  within  the  walls.  The  thickest  of  the  fight 
was  therefore  often  around  this  oven,  for  the  men  of 
Courci  stood  in  arms  to  defend  their  bread  while 
De  Belesme's  followers  endeavoured  to  carry  it  off. 
This  led  occasionally  to  a  general  engagement,  in 
which  there  was  much  slaughter,  without  special 
advantage  to  either  side ;  but  in  one  of  them,  the 
besiegers  having  repulsed  their  assailants,  set  fire  to 
the  belfry,  and  succeeded  in  destroying  it. 

Hugh  de  Grentmesnil,  who  did  not  bear  arms  him- 


HUGH  DE  GEENTMESN1L.  81 

self,  on  account  of  his  advanced  age,  was  much  dis- 
tressed by  the  long  continuance  of  the  siege,  and  in 
consequence  sent  the  following  message  to  the  Duke 
of  Normandy: — "  I  long  served  your  father  and  grand- 
father, and  suffered  much  in  their  service  ;  I  have  also 
always  been  loyal  to  you.  What  have  I  done  1  Tn 
what  have  I  offended  you  ?  How  have  I  merited  at 
your  hands  this  hostility  ?  I  openly  acknowledge 
you  as  my  liege  lord,  and  on  that  account  will  not 
appear  in  arms  against  you ;  but  I  offer  you  two 
hundred  Hvres  to  withdraw  when  it  may  suit  your 
pleasure  for  one  single  day,  that  I  may  fight  Robert 
de  Belesme ! "  Orderic  has  not  acquainted  us  with 
the  reply  of  Court-heuse  to  this  manly  appeal  of  the 
chivalric  old  warrior,  who,  as  he  mentions  his  service 
to  the  Duke's  grandfather,  could  not  at  this  period 
have  been  much  under  eighty. 

At  all  events,  neither  the  letter  nor  the  mediation 
of  Gerrard,  Bishop  of  Se'ez,  who  took  up  his  abode  at 
the  Convent  of  Dive  during  the  siege,  in  the  hope  of 
restoring  peace  in  his  diocese,  had  any  effect  upon 
either  the  Duke  or  Robert  de  Belesme ;  but  the 
arrival  of  King  William  (Rufus)  with  a  great  fleet 
caused  them  to  decamp  with  all  haste  and  dis- 
band their  forces,  each  man  returning  to  his  own 
home. 

VOL.  II.  O 


82  THE  CONQUEEOE  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

Three  years  afterwards,  Hugh  de  Grentmesnil  was 
again  in  England,  and  worn  out  with  age  and 
infirmity,  finding  his  end  approaching,  assumed,  in 
accordance  with  the  common  practice  of  the  period, 
the  habit  of  a  monk,  and  expired  six  days  after  he 
had  taken  to  his  bed,  22nd  of  February,  1094,  accord- 
ing to  our  present  calculation,  and  presumably  in  the 
city  of  Leicester. 

His  body,  preserved  in  salt  and  sewn  up  in  the  hide 
of  an  ox,  was  conveyed  to  Normandy  by  two  monks 
of  St.  Evroult,  named  Bernard  and  David,  and  honour- 
ably buried  by  the  Abbot  Roger  on  the  south  side 
of  the  Chapter  House,  near  the  tomb  of  Abbot 
Mainer. 

Arnold  de  Tillieul,  his  nephew,  caused  a  marble 
slab  to  be  placed  over  his  grave,  for  which  Orderic 
tells  us  he  himself  furnished  the  Latin  epitaph  in 
heroic  verse,  with  which  he  obliges  his  readers;  but 
as  it  is  simply  laudatory  I  will  not  inflict  it  on  mine, 
observing  only  that  it  is  a  relief  to  feel  that  in  this 
instance  the  praise  appears  to  have  been  truly  de- 
served, as  I  find  nothing  recorded  of  Hugh  de  Grent- 
mesnil that  does  not  redound  to  his  credit. 

In  his  youth  we  are  told  he  married  a  very  beauti- 
ful lady,  Adeliza,  daughter  of  Ivo,  Count  of  Beau- 
mont-sur-1'Oise,  by  his  first  wife  Judith,  with  whom 


EICHAED  DE   COUECI.  83 

he    had   Brokesbourne,  in    Herefordshire,  and   three 
lordships  in  Warwickshire. 

She  died  at  Kouen  seven  years  before  her  husband, 
and  was  buried  in  the  Chapter  House  of  St.  Evroult,* 
having  had  issue  by  him  five  sons  and  as  many 
daughters — namely,  Eobert,  William,  Hugh,  Ivo,  and 
Aubrey ;  Adeline,  Hawise,  Rohais,  Matilda,  and 
Agnes — none  of  whom  except  Robert  lived  to  an 
advanced  age,  and  he,  although  thrice  married,  died 
without  issue  in  1136.  Hugh  died  young.  William, 
Ivo,  and  Aubrey  forfeited  their  reputation  for  bravery 
by  their  dishonourable  and  ludicrous  escape  from 
Antioch,  which  obtained  for  them  the  name  of  rope- 
dancers.  With  the  exception  of  Hawise,  who  died 
unmarried,  his  daughters  became  the  wives  of  noble 
knights  :  Adeline,~of  Roger  d'lvri,  Rohais,  of  Robert 
de  Courci,  Matilda,  of  Hugh  de  Montpincon,  and 
Agnes,  of  William  de  Say. 


EICHAED  DE  COTJECI. 

I  have  just  mentioned  Robert,  the  son  of  this 
Richard,  and  son-in-law  of  Hugh  de  Grentmesnil,  and 
shall  conclude  this  chapter  with  a  notice  of  this 

*  A  charter  of  her  son  IYO  indicates  that  she  was  buried  at  Ber- 
mondsey. 

o  2 


84  THE  CONQUEBOK  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

memorable  family,  the  direct  male  descendant  of 
\vliich  wears  at  the  present  day  the  coronet  of  a  baron, 
one  of  the  very  few  instances  that  can  be  quoted  of  an 
unbroken  line  of  nobles  in  the  same  family  from  the 
Conquest. 

Wace  simply  mentions  "  Oil  de  Corcie "  amongst 
those  knights  who  "  that  day  slew  many  English." 

Courci  is  in  the  arrondissement  of  Falaise,  and  I  have 
just  described  its  siege  by  Robert  Court-heuse  in  1091, 
at  which  time  it  was  held  by  Richard  de  Courci,  the 
companion  of  the  Conqueror.  He  was  the  son  of 
Robert  de  Courci,  who  was  one  of  the  six  sons  of 
Baldric  the  Teuton,  or  German,  Lord  of  Bacqueville- 
en-Caux,  and  held  the  office  of  Archearius  under  Duke 
William.  He  married  a  niece  of  Gilbert  Comte  de 
-Brionne,  grandson  of  Richard  first  Duke  of  Normandy, 
name  unknown,  by  whom  he  had  six  sons  and  two 
daughters,  and  here  we  have  an  example  of  the  diffi- 
culty the  general  reader  would  experience  in  endeavour- 
ing to  form  an  idea  of  the  family  and  connections  of 
many  important  personages  with  whose  names  he  in- 
cidentally meets  in  the  popular  histories  of  England. 
Robert,  the  third  of  these  six  sons,  alone  bore  the  name 
of  De  Courci :  all  the  rest  assumed  surnames  simi- 
larly derived  from  their  particular  properties  or  the 
place  of  their  birth.  The  eldest,  Nicholas,  succeeding 


RICHABD  DE  COUECI.  85 

to  his  father's  fief  of  Bacqueville-en-Caux,  was  thence 
called  Nicholas  de  Bacqueville.  The  second  son,  Fulk, 
was  named  Fulk  d'Aunou  from  his  fief  of  Aunou  le 
Faucon,  arrondissement  of  Argentan.  Richard,  the 
fourth  son,  was  the  first  of  the  famous  name  of  Nevil, 
derived  from  his  fief  of  Neuville-sur-Tocque,  in  the 
department  of  the  Orne  and  the  canton  of  Gacd. 
Baldric,  fifth  son,  was  surnamed  de  Balgenzais,  from 
his  fief  of  Bouquence  or  Bouquency.  The  youngest,. 
Vigerius  or  Wiger,  was  named  after  an  uncle,  and  also 
called  Apulensis,  having  been  born,  it  is  presumed,  in 
Apulia.  Who,  meeting  with  the  names  of  these  noble 
and  powerful  Normans  in  their  study  of  English  his- 
tory, would,  without  such  an  explanation,  suspect  they 
were  all  sons  of  the  same  father,  and  cousins  of- William 
the  Conqueror  on  their  mother's  side  ?  Elizabeth, 
named  after  her  aunt,  who  was  a  nun  at  St.  Amand, 
married  Fulk  de  Boneval ;  and  Hawise  was  the  wife 
of  Robert  Fitz  Erneis,  who  fought  and  fell  at  Senlac. 

It  was  Robert,  the  third  son  of  Baldric  the 
Teuton,  as  I  have  said,  who  assumed  the  name  of  De 
Courci  from  his  inheritance  of  Courci-sur-Dive,  and 
transmitted  it  to  his  immediate  descendants.  His  son 
Richard  married  a  lady  named  Guadelinodis,  and  was 
the  Sire  de  Courci  present  at  Hastings  and  Senlac. 
For  his  services  he  received  from  the  Conqueror  the 


86  THE  CONQUEEOE  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

barony  of  Stoke  in  the  county  of  Somerset,  and  the 
manors  of  Newnham,  Setenden,  and  Foxcote,  in  Oxford- 
shire. At  least,  he  held  them  at  the  time  of  the  great 
survey. 

We  hear  no  more  of  him  during  the  reign  of  the 
elder  William,  though  it  is  improbable  he  could  have 
remained  quiescent  during  all  the  commotions  that 
were  constantly  convulsing  the  duchy ;  but  whether 
ne  fought  or  not  we  may  be  satisfied  that  he  remained 
loyal  to  the  Conqueror,  and  to  his  successor  William 
Eufus,  whose  opportune  arrival  in  Normandy  caused 
Robert  Court-heuse  and  Robert  de  Belesme  to  raise  the 
siege  of  Courci,  as  before  related. 

Both  he  and  his  friend  and  neighbour  Hugh  de 
Grentmesnil,  who  was  now  connected  with  him  by  the 
marriage  of  their  children,  were  considerably  advanced 
in  years,  and  lik,e  Hugh,  the  Lord  of  Courci,  may  not 
have  mingled  in  the  melee ;  but  it  is  strange  not  to 
find  Robert's  name  mentioned  amongst  the  gallant 
defenders  of  his  own  property  and  that  of  his  father- 
in-law. 

Besides  this  Robert,  whose  line  was  not  of  long  en- 
durance, Richard  had  a  second  son  named  William, 
from  whom  descended  the  famous  John  de  Courci, 
Earl  of  Ulster,  and  the  present  Lord  Kingsale,  who 
enjoys  the  enviable  privilege  of  wearing  his  hat  in  the 


EICHAED  BE  COUECI.  87 

presence  of  his  sovereign,  traditionally  granted  by 
King  John  to  the  said  Earl  of  Ulster  in  reward  for  the 
following  service. 

Philip  Augustus,  King  of  France,  having  proposed 
to  King  John  to  settle   the  difference  between  the 
Crowns  of  England  and  France  respecting  their  pre- 
tensions to  the  Duchy  of  Normandy  by  single  combat, 
had  appointed  on  his  side  a  champion.     King  John, 
who  had  unwarily  fixed  the  day,  could  find  no  one  of 
sufficient  strength -or  prowess  to  oppose  the  Frenchman 
but  the  Earl  of  Ulster,  who,  at  the  instigation  of  Hugh 
de  Lacy,  had  been  dispossessed  of  .his  estates,  and  was  a 
prisoner  in  the  Tower.    Having  accepted  the  challenge 
for  the  honour  of  his  country,  he  appeared  in  the  lists 
on  the  appointed  day,   and  so  terrified  the  French 
champion  by  his  gigantic  form  and  warlike  demeanour 
that,  on  the  third  sounding  of  the  trumpets,  he  wheeled 
about,  broke  through  the  lists,  and  galloping  to  the 
coast  took  ship  for  Spain,  leaving  De  Courci  victor 
without  a  blow.     To  gratify  King  Philip,  who  desired 
an  exhibition  of  his  extraordinary  strength,  the  Earl 
directed   a   massive   suit  of  mail   surmounted   by  a 
helmet  to  be  placed  on  a  block,  and  at  one  stroke  he 
cleft  armour  and  helmet  asunder,  his  sword  entering 
so  deep  into  the  wood  that  no  one  present  could  pull 
it  out  with  both  hands,  but  he  did  in  an  instant  with 


88  THE  CONQUEKOB  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

one.  King  John  being  well  satisfied  with  his  extra- 
ordinary service  restored  him  to  his  titles  and  estates, 
and  bade  him  ask  besides  anything  it  was  in  his 
power  to  grant,  to  which  the  Earl  replied,  that  he  had 
titles  and  estates  enough,  but  desired  that  he  and  his 
successors,  the  heirs-male  of  his  family,  might  have 
the  privilege,  their  first  obeisance  being  paid,  to  remain 
covered  in  the  presence  of  him  and  his  successors  the 
Kings  of  England,  which  was  granted  accordingly. 
There  is  about  as  much  truth  in  this  story  as  there 
was  in  the  one  formerly  told  by  the  warders  in  the 
Tower  of  London,  who  were  wont  to  show  a  remarkably 
large  suit  of  plate  armour  of  the  time  of  Henry  VIII. 
as  being  that  of  the  very  redoubtable  John  dc  Courci 
aforesaid. 

The  King  of  France,  Philip  Augustus,  never  set  foot 
in  England.  William  II.,  King  of  Scotland,  never  saw 
King  John,  save  on  the  one  occasion  when  he  did 
homage  to  him  at  Lincoln.  De  Courci  was  never  re- 
stored to  his  estates  by  John,  and  no  one  knows  when 
a  privilege,  as  worthless  as  it  is  unmannerly,  was  con- 
ferred, or  by  whom  or  on  what  authority  it  was  first 
claimed  and  exercised. 

Almericus,  the  twenty-third  Baron  Kingsale,  aston- 
ished King  William  III.  by  presenting  himself  with 
his  hat  on,  but  had  the  good  taste  to  reverse  the 


RICHARD  DE  COUECI.  89 

custom  by  remaining  uncovered  after  the  first  assertion 
of  his  privilege. 

George  II.  good-humouredly  observed  to  Gerald, 
cousin  and  successor  of  Almericus,  that,  although  his 
lordship  had  a  right  to  wear  his  hat  before  him,  he 
had  no  right  to  do  so  before  ladies. 

Let  us  trust  that  good  sense  and  good  taste  will 
combine  to  abolish  an  absurd  custom,  for  the  observ- 
ance of  which  no  credible  authority  can  be  produced 
— no  dignity  lost  by  its  discontinuance. 


CHAPTER  IV. 


WILLIAM  DE  ALBINI. 
WILLIAM  MALET. 
WILLIAM  DE  VIEUXPONT. 


EAOUL  TAISSON. 
WILLIAM  DE  MOULINS. 
HUGH  DE  GOURNAY. 


WILLIAM  DE  ALBINI. 

THAT  one  or  more  of  the  family  of  Aubigny 
(Latinised  into  De  Albinio,  and  better  known  in 
England  as  De  Albini)  "  came  over  with  the  Con- 
queror/' and  fought  at  Hastings,  there  can  be  no 
question ;  but  "Wace,  who  does  not  specify  the 
individual,  but  simply  calls  him  "li  boteillier 
d'Aubignie,"  has  been  accused  of  an  anachronism  by 
Mr.  Taylor,  who  considers  the  office  of  Pincerna,  or 
butler,  to  have  been  first  conferred  upon  the  grand- 
son of  William  by  Henry  I.  circa  1100,  when  for  his 
services  to  that  monarch  he  was  enfeoffed  of  the 
barony  of  Buckenham  to  hold  in  grand-sergeantry  by 
the  butlery,  an  office  now  discharged  at  coronations 
by  the  Duke  of  Norfolk,  his  descendants  possessing  a 


WILLIAM  DE  ALBINI.  91 

part  of  the  barony.  The  companion  of  the  Conqueror 
he  believes  to  have  been  William,  the  first  of  that  name 
we  know  of,  or  his  son  Eoger,  father  of  the  second 
William]  and  Nigel  de  Albini,  of  whom  we  have  pre- 
viously spoken  (p.  30). 

M.  le  PreVost  votes  for  Roger,  who  made  a  dona- 
tion to  the  Abbey  of  L'Essai  in  1084.  There  is  no 
reason  why  he  should  not  also  have  been  in  the  battle. 

In  the  absence  of  conclusive  evidence  I  have  headed 
this  chapter  with  -William  de  Albini,  the  earliest 
known  of  that  name,  which  he  derived  from  the  com- 
mune of  Aubigny,  near  Periers,  in  the  Cotentin, 
and  with  whom  the  family  pedigree  commences. 

This  William  married  a  sister  of  Grimoult  du 
Plessis,  the  traitor  of  Valognes  and  Val-es-Dunes,  who 
died  in  his  dungeon  in  1047  (vol.  i.,  pp.  25  and  31), 
and  Wace  may  after  all  be  right  in  styling  him  "  Le 
Botellier,"  as  it  is  probable  that  he  held  that  office  in 
the  household  of  the  Duke  of  Normandy.  By  his  wife, 
the  sister  of  Grimoult  (I  have  not  yet  lighted  on  her 
name),  he  had  a  son,  the  Roger  d' Aubigny  aforesaid, 
who  married  Amicia,  or  Avitia,  sister  of  Geoffrey, 
Bishop  of  Coutances,  and  of  Roger  de  Montbrai,  and  is 
supposed  by  M.  le  PreVost  to  have  been  with  his 
brothers-in-law  in  the  battle. 

Roger  d' Aubigny,  or  De  Albini,  had  issue  by  his 


92  THE  CONQUEROR  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

wife  Avitia  de  Montbrai,  five  sons  :  William,  known 
as  William  de  Albini  "  Pincerna"  (i.e.,  Butler),  ancestor 
of  the  Earls  of  Sussex,  who  married  Maud,  daughter 
of  Eoger  le  Bigod,  and  died  1139.  Richard,  Abbot  of 
St.  Albans,  Nigel,  Humphrey,  and  Rualon,  or  Ralph. 
Nigel,  the  third  son,  was  heir  of  Robert  de  Montbrai, 
or  Mowbray,  his  first  cousin,  whose  wife  he  married 
during  the  lifetime  of  her  husband  by  licence  of  Pope 
Paschal,  and  for  some  time  treated  her  with  respect 
out  of  regard  for  her  noble  parents  ;  but  on  the  death 
of  her  brother  Gilbert  de  1'Aigle,  having  no  issue  by 
her,  he  craftily  sought  for  a  divorce  on  the  ground  of 
that  very  kinship  which  he  exerted  so  much  influence 
to  induce  the  Pope  to  overlook,  and  then  married 
Gundred,  daughter  of  Gerrard  de  Gournay,  by  whom 
he  had  Roger,  who  assumed  the  name  of  Mowbray, 
and  transmitted  it  to  his  descendants,  Dukes  of  Norfolk 
and  Earls  Marshal  of  England ;  and  Henri,  ancestor 
of  the  line  of  Albini  of  Cainho. 

To  return  to  the  first  William,  it  is  clear  that  his 
grandsons  were  mere  infants  even  if  born  in  1066, 
and  therefore  I  believe  that  it  was  the  William,  then 
Pincerna,  and  probably  also  Roger,  his  son,  who  were 
companions  of  the  Conqueror  in  his  expedition ; 
Roger's  eldest  brother  William  being  in  disgrace  in 
Normandy  at  the  time,  and  not  restored  to  favour, 


WILLIAM  DE  ALBINI.  93 

or   allowed    to    enter   England  before    the  reign   of 
Rufus,  or  it  may  have  been  Henry  I. 

Of  William  de  Albini,  third  son  and  successor  of 
William  II.,  and  Maud  le  Bigod,  a  romantic  story  has 
been  invented  to  account  for  the  lion  rampant  subse- 
quently borne  by  his  descendants. 

Having  captivated  the  heart  of  the  Queen  Dowager 
of  France  by  his  gallant  conduct  in  a  tournament  at 
Paris,  she  offered  to  marry  him,  an  honour  which  he 
respectfully  declined^  having  already  given  his  word 
and  faith  to  a  lady  in  England,  another  Queen 
Dowager,  no  less  a  personage  than  Adeliza,  widow  of 
King  Henry  I.  of  England.  His  refusal  so  angered  the 
French  Queen,  that  she  laid  a  plot  with  her  attendants 
to  destroy  him  by  inducing  him  to  enter  a  cave  in  her 
garden,  where  a  lion  had  been  placed  for  that  pur- 
pose ;  but  the  undaunted  Earl,  rolling  his  mantle  round 
his  arm,  thrust  his  hand  into  the  lion's  mouth,  tore 
out  its  tongue,  and  sent  it  to  the  Queen  by  one  of  her 
maids.  "  In  token  of  which  noble  and  valiant 
act,"  says  Brooke,  in  his  "  Catalogue  of  Nobility," 
"this  William  assumed  to  bear  for  his  arms  a  lion 
gold  in  a  field  gules,  which  his  successors  ever  since 
continued." 

As  this  third  William  de  Albini  died  as  late   as 
1176,  it  is  possible  he  might  have,  assumed  armorial 


94  THE   CONQUEEOB  AND  HIS   COMPANIONS. 

bearings,  but  the  lion  was  more  probably  first  borne 
by  his  son,  the  second  Earl  of  Arundel  of  the  line  of 
Aubigny,  in  token  of  his  descent  from  Adeliza,  widow 
of  Henry  I.,  in  whose  reign  we  have  the  earliest  evi- 
dence of  golden  lions  being  adopted  as  a  personal 
decoration,  if  not  strictly  an  heraldic  bearing. 

WILLIAM  MALET. 

Here  again  is  a  memorable  personage  of  whose 
origin  and  family  little  is  known.  Wace  mentions 
him  as  "  Guillaume  ki  Ten  dit  Mallet,"  but  why  so 
called  has  not  even  been  guessed  at.  Geoffrey,  Count 
of  Anjou,  is  popularly  said  to  have  received  his  name 
of  Martel  from  the  horseman's  hammer,  which  is 
assumed  to  have  been  his  favourite  weapon ;  but  this, 
like  many  such  stories,  is  unsupported  by  any  sub- 
stantial evidence,  and  is  contested  by  the  French 
antiquary,  M.  de  la  Mairie,  who  asserts  that  Martel  is 
simply  another  form  of  Martin,  and  the  well-known 
charge  in  heraldry,  Martlet,  Martelette,  or  little 
Martin,  or  Swallow,  appears  to  corroborate  that  asser- 
tion. Therefore,  although  the  "maillet,"  a  two- 
headed  hammer,  was  as  early  known  to  the  Normans 
as  the  "martel  de  fer,"*  if,  indeed,  it  were  not  the 

*  "  L'un  tient  une  6pee  sans  fourre, 

L'autre  une  maillet,  1'autre  une  hache." 

Guiart. ,  y.  6635. 


WILLIAM  MALET.  95 


same  weapon,  I  have  no  belief  in  such  a  derivation, 
the  name  being,  moreover,  borne  by  the  whole  family. 
Whether  the  companion  of  the  Conqueror  was  the 
first  so  called  is  unknown.  Le  Provost  simply  says 
he  was  the  source  of  a  noble  race  still  existing  in 
France,  that  of  Malet  de  Graville. 

The  author  of  "  Carmen  de  Bello  "  tells  us  he  was 
partly  Norman  and  partly  English,  and  "Compater 
Heraldi,"  which  would  seem  to  signify  joint  sponsor 
with  Harold,  compere,  as  the  French  have  it  (vide 
Ducange  in  voce). 

It  would  be  interesting  to  discover  whose  child 
they  stood  godfathers  to,  and  why  we  find  him  in  the 
ranks  of  his  fellow-gossip;*  the  knowledge  of  that 
fact  might  reveal  to  us  many  others.  Was  it  in 
England  or  in  Normandy  that  he  stood  at  the  font 
with  Harold  ?  If  in  the  latter,  it  must  have  been  in 
1062,  during  the  enforced  visit  of  Godwin's  son  to 
Duke  William,  the  year  in  which  Adela  was  born. 
Is  it  possible  that  Harold  and  William  Malet  were  her 
godfathers  ?  Guy,  of  Amiens,  Matilda's  almoner , 
would  certainly  be  cognizant  of  that  fact. 

His  name,  however,  is   not  met  with,  I   believe, 

*  From  the  Saxon  God-syb,  a  relation  in  God.  There  was  formerly 
a  spiritual  kinship  supposed  to  exist  between  a  child  and  its  sponsors 
expressed  by  the  word  gossiprede. 


96  THE  CONQUEEOB  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

either  in  Saxon  or  Norman  annals  previous  to  the 
invasion,  when  we  hear  of  his  valour  and  his  peril. 
"  Guillaume,  whom  they  call  Mallet,  also  threw  him- 
self boldly  into  the  midst.  With  his  naming  sword 
he  terrified  the  English.  But  they  pierced  his  shield 
and  killed  his  horse,  and  he  would  have  been  slain 
himself,  when  the  Sire  de  Montfort  and  William  de 
Vez-Pont  (Vieuxpont)  came  up  with  a  strong  force, 
and  gallantly  rescued  him,  though  with  the  loss  of 
many  of  their  men,  and  mounted  him  on  a  fresh 
horse"  (Roman  de  Rou,  1.  13,472-85). 

We  next  hear  of  him  as  the  person  appointed  by 
the  Conqueror  to  take  charge  of  the  body  of  Harold, 
which  had  been  discovered  by  the  swan-necked 
Eadgyth,  and  to  bury  it  on  the  sea-shore ;  his 
selection  for  that  purpose  would  seem  to  have  some 
connection  with  the  curious  statement  of  Bishop 
Guy,  as  from  his  previous  knowledge  of  the  Saxon 
King,  and  the  spiritual  brotherhood  which  is  said  to 
have  existed  between  them,  he  may  have  been  con- 
sidered by  William  to  have  the  best  claim  to  the 
melancholy  honour  after  the  mother,  to  whom  it  had 
been  sternly  refused. 

After  this  we  find  him  mentioned  as  accompanying 
the  newly-seated  sovereign  in  his  expedition  to  the 
North,  and  the  reduction  of  Nottingham  and  York 


WILLIAM  MALET.  97 


(1068),  in  which  year  Mulct  was  rewarded  with  the 
shrievalty  of  Yorkshire,  and  large  grants  of  land  in 
the  county.  He  was  in  York  the  following  year,  and 
governor  of  the  castle  (newly  built  by  the  Conqueror) 
when  it  was  besieged  by  the  Northumbrians,  led  by 
the  Saxon  prince  Edgar.  The  citizens  having  joined 
the  insurgents,  William  Malet,  sorely  pressed,  sent  to 
the  King  for  assistance,  without  which  he  assured 
him  he  should  be  compelled  to  surrender.  The  King 
arrived  with  a  powerful  force  in  time  to  raise  the 
siege  and  take  fearful  vengeance  on  the  besiegers, 
as  well  as  on  the  city  and  its  inhabitants.  Again, 
with  Gilbert  de  Ghent  he  was  in  command  in 
York  when  the  Danes  assaulted  it  in  1069  arid  in  con- 
junction with  the  Earls  Waltheof  and  Gospatric  burnt 
the  city,  slew  three  thousand  Normans,  and  took 
prisoners  Gilbert  de  Ghent  and  William  Malet,  with 
his  wife  and  two  of  their  children. 

How  long  he  remained  in  captivity  does  not  appear, 
nor  where  or  at  what  time  or  under  what  circum- 
stances he  died.  Lucia,  widow  of  Koger  Fitz  Gerald, 
and  subsequently  Countess  of  Chester,  is  stated,  in  a 
grant  of  King  Henry  IL,  to  have  been  niece  of  Robert 
Malet  and  of  Alan  of  Lincoln  ;  and  this  Robert  is 
said  to  have  been  the  son  of  a  William  Malet,  slain 
in  1069.  the  period  at  which  our  William  Malet  was 


VOL.  II. 


98  THE  CONQUEROR  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

taken  prisoner  at  York.  Another  William  Malet,  set 
down  as  the  son  of  Hesilia  Crispin,  died  an  old  man 
in  the  Abbey  of  Bee  ;  but  there  is  no  identifying  either 
with  the  companion  of  the  Conqueror,  though  each 
has  a  claim  to  the  distinction,  for  our  William,  the 
sheriff  of  Yorkshire  and  compere  of  Harold,  certainly 
had  a  son  and  heir  named  Robert,  and  a  sister  of 
William  Crispin,  named  Hesilia,  is  variously  asserted 
to  have  been  the  mother  or  wife  of  the  William  Malet 
who  fought  at  Senlac. 

He  was  a  witness  to  a  charter  of  King  William  to 
the  Church  of  St.  Martin-le-Grand  in  London,  and  is 
therein  styled  "  Princeps."  He  also  gave  Conteville 
in  Normandy  to  the  Abbey  of  Bee,*  which  indicates 
some  connection  with  Herluin  and  Herleve.  How  came 
he  possessed  of  Conteville  ?  We  knowr  that  Herluin 
had  been  previously  married,  and  had  by  his  first  wife 
a  son  named  Ralf.  Was  that  first  wife  an  English- 
woman, and  had  she  a  second  son  named  William, 
heir  eventually  to  Conteville  ?  Glover,  in  his  invalu- 
able collections,  has  jotted  down  the  subscribing 
witnesses  to  a  charter  by  a  Gilbert  Malet,  who  styles 
himself  "Dapifer  Regis,"  and  we  find  amongst  them 
William  Malet,  his  heir  "hserede  meo,"  Robert,  and 

*  "De  dono  Gulielmi  Malet  manerium  de  Conteville  cum  ecclesia 
et  omnibus  ejusdem  ecclesise  et  manerii  pertinentiis  suis"  (Neustria 
Pia,  p.  484). 


WILLIAM  DE  VIEUXPONT.  99 

Kalph,  brothers  of  William,  and  another  William, 
grandson  or  nephew  of  the  grantor  ("  nepote  meo  "). 
Unfortunately  it  is  without  date ;  but  I  am  inclined 
to  consider  Gilbert  a  brother  of  the  sheriff,  and  the 
William  he  calls  his  nephew,  the  youngest  of  the 
two  sons  of  the  sheriff,  who  were  taken  prisoners  with 
him  at  York  ;  the  other  being  Robert,  who  succeeded 
him,  obtained  the  honour  of  Eye  in  Suffolk,  and 
at  the  compilation  of  Domesday  was  found  to 
possess  two  hundred  and  sixty-eight  manors  in 
England,  Eye  being  the  chief.  His  father  was  then 
dead,  and  that  is  all  we  at  present  know  for  a  cer- 
tainty. If  not  slain  in  1069,  he  might  well  be  the 
old  man  who  died  in  the  Abbey  of  Bee,  to  which  he 
was  a  benefactor,  for  we  have  no  means  of  guessing 
his  [age  at  the  time  of  the  invasion.  The  smallest 
contribution  to  his  history  would  be  gratefully 
received. 

WILLIAM  DE  VIEUXPONT. 

The  combatant  at  Senlac  who  with  the  Sire  de 
Montfort  saved  the  life  of  William  Malet,  as  described 
in  the  preceding  memoir,  is  named  by  Wace,  who 
records  the  incident,  "  William."  M.  le  PreVost  says, 
authoritatively,  that  it  was  Robert  de  Vieuxpont,  and 
he  is  followed  by  Mr.  Taylor,  who  produces  no  evidence 

H  2 


100         THE  COXQUEEOE  AND  HIS   COMPANIONS. 

in  corroboration  of  the  assertion  of  the  learned 
antiquary  whose  opinion  he  has  adopted,  and  which 
appears  to  have  been  formed  not  upon  any  contempo- 
rary documents,  but  from  the  simple  fact  of  a  Eobert 
de  Vieuxpont,  or  Vipount,  as  it  became  anglicised, 
having  been  sent  in  1073  to  Normandy,  to  the  assist- 
ance of  Jean  de  la  Fleche,  as  stated  by  Orderic  (lib.  iv. 
cap.  13) ;  but  the  existence  of  a  Eobert  de  Vieuxpont 
in  1073  does  not  convince  me  that  there  was  not  a 
William,  lord  of  Vieuxpont,  at  Hastings  in  1 066.  Wace, 
it  is  true,  cannot  be  implicitly  depended  upon  for  the 
baptismal  names  of  the  personages  he  mentions  as 
taking  part  in  the  great  battle ;  and  M.  le  Prevost 
has  in  two  or  three  instances  made  some  valuable 
corrections  of  his  text  on  good  and  sufficient  authority  ; 
but  in  this  case  he  cites  none  in  support  of  his  assertion, 
and  therefore,  with  great  respect  for  his  opinion,  I 
venture  to  differ  from  him  and  accept  Wace's  account, 
which  is  uncontradicted  by  anything  within  my  know- 
ledge, and  has  great  probability  in  its  favour. 

William  and  Eobert  were  favourite  names  in  the 
family,  supposed  to  have  its  origin  in  Vieuxpont-en- 
Ange,  in  the  arrondissement  of  Lisieux  ;  and  in  1131 
there  was  a  William  de  Vipount,  apparently  a  son  of 
the  Eobert  aforesaid,  who  claimed  certain  lands  in 
Devonshire,  and  agreed  that  his  right  to  them  should 


WILLIAM  DE  VIEUXPONT.  101 

be  determined  by  a  trial  by  battle.  A  Robert  de 
Vieuxpont,  probably  his  brother,  was  with  the  Cru- 
saders at  Sardonas,  near  Antioch,  in  1 1 1 1 ;  and  in  the 
4th  of  John  (1203)  we  have  another  William  obtaining 
the  King's  precept  to  the  Steward  of  Normandy,  to 
have  a  full  possession  of  the  lordship  of  Vipount  in 
that  duchy,  as  Robert  de  Vipount,  his  brother,  had 
when  he  went  into  France  after  the  war. 

All  these  Williams  and  Roberts  are  mixed  up  to- 
gether by  Dugdale.  in  the  most  inextricable  confusion. 
It  is  not  my  duty  here  to  attempt  the  task  of  identi- 
fying and  affiliating  them,  and  they  are  only  men- 
tioned in  order  to  explain  my  reason  for  believing 
that  the  first  Robert  we  hear  of  had  a  brother  or  per- 
haps a  father  named  William,  who  was  the  companion 
of  the  Conqueror  mentioned  by  Wace,  a  belief  which 
does  not  preclude  the  possibility  of  Robert's  presence 
at  Hastings  also. 

As  we  hear  no  more  of  William  after  his  rescue  of 
William  Malet,  it  is  probable  that  he  died  previous  to 
1073,  and  may  indeed  have  been  killed  at  Senlac  ;  for 
it  is  a  singular  fact  that  only  three  Normans  of  note 
are  named  as  having  faUen  in  that  battle,  although 
hundreds  must  have  done  so.  That  we  have  no  list 
of  the  killed  and  wounded  in  the  Saxon  army  is  not 
surprising,  but  that  none  of  the  Norman  writers  should 


102         THE  CONQUEROK  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

have  thought  fit  to  perpetuate  the  memories  of  the 
noble  and  gallant  knights  who  perished  in  that  me- 
morable conflict  is  to  me  most  surprising. 

The  first  Robert  is  said  by  Orderic  to  have  been 
killed  at  the  siege  of  St.  Suzanne  in  1085  ;  but  M.  le 
Prevost  quotes  a  charter  of  Henry  I.  in  favour  of 
the  Abbey  of  St.  Pierre-sur-Dive,  which  records  his 
having  become  a  monk  in  that  house. 

We  hear  nothing  of  the  wives  of  the  first  Vipounts, 
nor  by  what  means  they  became  possessed  of  the  lands 
they  held  in  England,  but  great  accessions  of  honours 
and  estates^were  acquired  in  the  reign  of  King  John 
by  a  Robert  de  Vipount,  wTho~was  high  in  favour  with 
that  sovereign,  and  had  custody  of  the  unfortunate 
Prince  Arthur,  taken  prisoner  in  the  battle  of  Miravelt, 
for  his  services  in  which  Robert  had  a  grant  from 
the  King  of  the  castle  and  barony  of  Appleby;  and, 
adhering  strictly  to  John  during  the  whole  of  his 
reign,  is  ranked  by  Matthew  Paris,  with  a  brother 
named  Ivo,  amongst  the  King's  wicked  counsellors. 

This  Robert's  mother  we  find  was  Maude,  daughter 
of  Hugh  de  Moreville,  of  Kirk  Anvald,  county  Cum- 
berland, who  gave  divers  lands  in  Westmoreland  to 
the  Abbey  of  Shap,  but  of  which  previous  Robert  or 
William  she  was  the  wife  does  not  appear.  Her  son, 
the  favourite  of  King  John  married  Idonea,  daughter 


WILLIAM  DE  VIEUXPONT.  103 

of  John  de  Builly,  lord  of  the  honor  of  Tickhill,  of 
which,  with  all  the  lands  and  chattels  of  his  father-in- 
law,  he  had  livery  in  1114,  and  died  in  1228  (12th  of 
Henry  III.),  being  then — notwithstanding  his  great 
revenues,  the  wealth  he  had  amassed  by  rapine  and 
plunder  during  the  civil  wars,  and  the  emoluments 
derived  from  the  various  offices  he  held,  amongst 
others  those  of  a  justice  itinerant  in  the  county  of  York 
and  one  of  the  justices  of  the  Court  of  Common  Pleas — 
indebted  to  the  King  in  the  sum  of  1997Z.  11  s.  6d., 
besides  five  great  horses  of  price  for  five  tuns  of  wine, 
which  debt  was  not  paid  off  many  years  after. 

The  male  line  of  these  Vipounts  terminated  in  the 
grandson  of  this  Robert,  who  was  slain,  as  it  would 
seem,  in  the  battle  of  Evesham,  on  the  side  of  the 
rebellious  barons  under  Simon  de  Montfort,  A.D.  1261, 
when  his  lands  were  seized  by  the  King,  but  were  sub- 
sequently restored  to  his  two  daughters  and  co-heirs, 
Isabella  and  Idonea;  the  former  of  whom  married  Roger 
de  Clifford  and  the  latter  Roger  de  Leybourne,  after 
whose  death  she  re-married  with  John  de  Cromwell. 
Through  the  match  with  Clifford  the  Castle  of  Appleby 
and  other  estates  in  Westmoreland  and  Cumberland 
passed  into  the  family  of  the  Tuftons,  Earls  of  Thanet, 
and  are  at  present  in  the  possession  of  Sir  Henry 
Tufton,  Bart. 


104         THE  CONQUEROR  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

EAOUL  TAISSON. 

We  have  already  heard  of  a  Kaoul  Taisson,  Lord  of 
Cingueleiz,  at  the  battle  of  Val-es-Dunes  in  1047  ; 
descended,  it  is  supposed,  from  the  Counts  of  Anjou, 
and  the  founder  of  the  Abbey  of  Fontenay.  Three 
Lords  of  Cingueleiz  were  so  named  in  succession 
during  the  time  of  the  Conqueror.  '  The  "  Eaol 
Teisson  "  mentioned  by  Wace  as  present  at  Hastings, 
is  presumed  to  have  been  the  second,  and  the  son  of 
the  combatant  at  Val-es-Dunes. 

The  name  of  "  Kodulfi  Taisson,"  the  father,  is 
appended  to  the  foundation  charter  of  the  Priory  of 
Sigi  by  Hugh  de  Gournay  before  1035,  the  other 
witnesses  being  Neel  the  Viscount,  Geoffrey  the 
Viscount,  William  the  Count,  son  of  the  glorious 
Robert,  Duke  of  the  Normans,  and  William,  "  Magistri 
Comitis,"  whoever  he  may  be.  After  Val-es-Dunes  we 
find  him  summoned  by  the  Duke  to  his  aid  on  the 
invasion  of  the  French  in  1054.  He  is  not  named  in 
any  account  of  the  battle  of  Mortemer,  and  was  there- 
fore most  probably  with  the  Duke  himself. 

His  son,  Raoul  Taisson  II.,  followed  him  to  Hastings. 

o 

He  is  presumed  to  have  been  killed  in  the  battle,  as  no 
more  is  known  about  him,  nor  of  any  of  his  descend- 
ants in  England,  although  for  some  time  nourishing 


EAOUL  TAISSON.  103 


in  Normandy,  and  M.  le  Prevost  speaks  of  an  opu- 
lent family  existing  in  France,  which  claims  a  descent 
from  the  Norman  Lords  of  Cingucleiz. 

This  Raoul  Taisson,  the  second  of  the  name,  married 
Matilda,  daughter  of  Walter  the  uncle  of  King 
William,  who  had  so  carefully  watched  over  his  child- 
hood. Both  she  and  her  father  are  subscribing  wit- 
nesses to  the  foundation  charter  of  the  Abbey  of 
Fontenay,  the  lady  describing  herself  most  explicitly 
as  "  Mathildis  filia  Gualteri  avunculo  Gulielmi  Regis 
Anglorum."  She  was,  therefore,  a  first  cousin  of 
the  Conqueror ;  but  what  was  the  worldly  estate  of 
her  father  Walter  does  not  appear,  nor  who  was  the 
mother  of  the  said  Matilda.  By  her,  however,  Raoul 
had  a  son  Jordan  and  a  daughter  Letitia,*  in  whose 
fortunes  we  are  less  interested  than  in  those  of  their 
mother  and  grandfather,  some  knowledge  of  which 
would  be  invaluable  as  illustrating  a  branch  of  the 
Conqueror's  family  which  has  been  singularly 
neglected  by  chroniclers  and  genealogists  botk  past 
and  present,  the  few  facts  discovered  by  the  late 
Mr.  Stapleton  only  whetting  our  appetite  for  more. 

From  the  period  of  the  accession  of  the  boy  William 


*  Jordan  Taisson  married  one  of  the  daughters  of  the  last  Neil  de 
St.  Sauveur  (Hardy's  Rot.  Nona.  16) ;  her  name,  according  to  M.  de 
Gerville,  was  Letitia. 


106         THE  CONQUEEOE  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

to  that  of  the  foundation  of  the  Abbey  of  Fontenay, 
we  hear  nothing  of  uncle  Walter  but  what  his  dying 
nephew  relates  respecting  his  care  of  him  when  a 
child. 

The  marriage  of  his  daughter  Matilda  with  so  im- 
portant and  wealthy  a  person  as  Raoul  Taisson,  Sire  de 
Cingueleiz,  indicates  that  Walter  held  some  rank  and 
possessions  in  Normandy  at  that  period,  although  they 
have  never  been  specified. 

Who  was  Walter  de  Falaise,  father  of  an  un- 
doubted companion  of  the  Conqueror,  of  whom  I  will 
next  speak  in  order  to  continue  this  inquiry  ;  namely, 

WILLIAM  DE  MOULINS. 

William,  Lord  of  Moulins-la-Marche,  arrondissement 
of  Mortagne,  is  mentioned  by  Wace  as  one  of  the 
combatants  at  Senlac — 

"  E  dam  Willame  des  Molins  "  (Rvm.  de  Rou,  1.  13,565) ; 

but  neither  Le  Prevost  nor  Taylor  enlightens  us  as  to 
his  pedigree,  the  latter  merely  describing  him  as  the 
son  of  Walter  of  Falaise,  as  we  already  knew  from 
Orderic,  who  is  silent  respecting  the  family  of  his 
father  and  his  mother.  In  the  absence  of  any  infor- 
mation on  the  subject,  I  am  strongly  inclined  to 
believe  that  this  Walter  of  Falaise  was  the  Walter 
son  of  Fulbert  the  burgess  of  Falaise,  brother  of 


WILLIAM  DE  MOULINS.  107 

Herleve  and  uncle  of  William  the  Conqueror,  who 
with  his  daughter  Matilda,  wife  of  Raoul  Taisson,  wit- 
nessed the  foundation  charter  of  Fontenay  as  already 
stated. 

The  title  of  De  Moulins,  borne  by  the  son  of  Walter 
de  Falaise,  was  obtained  by  him  through  his  marriage 
with  Alberede  or  Albrede,  daughter  and  heir  of  a 
certain  Guitmund,  whose  hand  was  bestowed  by  the 
Conqueror  on  William,  with  the  whole  of  her  father's 
fief  of  Molines,  in  reward  of  his  services  either  at 
Senlac  or  elsewhere,  he  being,  as  Orderic  informs  us, 
"  a  gallant  soldier." 

In  conjunction  with  his  wife  Alberede  he  was  a 
great  benefactor  to  the  Abbey  of  St.  Evroult,  bestow- 
ing on  it  the  Church  of  Mahern,  with  the  titles  and  all 
the  priest's  lands  and  the  cemetery  belonging  to  it, 
the  Church  of  St.  Lawrence  in  the  town  of  Moulines, 
and  his  demesne  land  near  the  castle,  and  the  Church 
of  Bonmoulines,  with  all  the  tithes  of  corn,  the  mill, 
and  the  oven. 

In  1073  he  was  sent  by  King  William,  in  company 
with  William  de  Vieuxpont  and  other  brave  knights, 
to  the  assistance  of  John  de  la  Fleche  against  Fulk  le 
Rechin  (the  Quarreller),  Count  of  Anjou,  and  his  ally, 
Hoel  V.,  Duke  of  Brittany,  following  himself  with  a 
large  army  ;  but  serious  hostilities  were  prevented  by 


108         THE  CONQUEEOR  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

a  mediation  which  terminated  in  the  Peace  of  Blanch  e- 
lande  (vol.  i.,  p.  198). 

After  Albrcda  had  borne  him  two  sons,  William  and 
Robert,  it  appears  he  divorced  her  on  the  plea  of  con- 
sanguinity. This  may  afford  us  some  clue  to  the 
desired  information. 

William  married  secondly  Duda,  daughter  of  Wal- 
cran  de  Meulent,  by  whom  also  he  had  two  sons,  Simon 
and  Hugh,  who  were  both  cut  off  by  a  cruel  death, 
Orderic  informs  us,  leaving  no  issue.*  The  divorced 
Albreda  ended  her  days  in  a  nunnery. 

The  same  author,  describing  William  de  Moulines, 
says  "  he  was  too  fond  of  vain  and  empty  glory,  in 
pursuit  of  which  he  was  guilty  of  indiscriminate 
slaughter.  It  is  reported  that  he  shed  much  blood, 
and  that  his  ferocity  was  so  great  that  every  blow  he 
dealt  was  fatal.  Through  prosperity  and  adversity  he 
lived  to  grow  old,  and,  so  far  as  this  world  is  concerned, 
passed  his  days  in  honour.  Dying  at  length  in  his 
own  castle,  he  was  buried  in  the  chapter-house  of 
St.  Evroult." 

His  son  and  successor,  Robert,  fell  under  the  dis- 
pleasure of  Henry  I.,  was  banished,  and  with  his  wife 
Agnes,  daughter  of  Robert  de  Grentmesnil,  went  to 
Apulia,  where  he  died ;  his  brother  Simon  succeeded 

*  Hugh  was  drowned  in  the  wreck  of  "  the  White  Ship." 


HUGH  DE  GOURNAY.  109 

to  his  inheritance,  and  with  his  wife  Adeline  ,con- 
firmed  all  the  gifts  of  his  family  to  St.  Evroult.  He 
was  probably  personally  known  to  Orderic,  who  evi- 
dently knew  more  of  Guitmond  and  his  sons-in-law 
than  he  has  unfortunately  thought  it  necessary  to 
chronicle. 

HUGH  DE  GOUENAY. 

"  Le  viel  Hue  de  Gournai "  may  well  have  de- 
served that  venerable  distinction  in  the  year  1066, 
since  the  same  writer  has  bestowed  it  upon  him  in 
1054,  when  he  was  one  of  the  commanders  in  the 
sanguinary  battle  of  Mortemer  (vide  vol.  i.,  p.  234),  and 
is  even  then  spoken  of  as  "  De  Gornai  le  viel  Huon." 
Moreover,  he  is  presumed  by  M.  de  Gondeville,  the 
historian  of  the  family,  to  be  identical  with  the  "  Hugo 
Miles  "  who  authorised  the  gift  of  the  land  of  Calvel- 
ville  to  the  Abbey  of  Montvilliers  by  William  the 
Count,  son  of  Robert  Duke  of  Normandy,  which  he 
considers  must  have  been  before  the  death  of  Robert 
in  1035.  Allowing,  however,  that  he  was  of  full  age 
as  early  even  as  1030,  though  children  scarcely  in 
their  teens  were  accustomed  to  witness  charters  when 
they  had  a  contingent  interest  in  the  property  be- 
stowed, still,  admitting  he  was  one-and-twenty  at 
that  date,  he  would  not  have  been  sixty  at  the  time  of 


110         THE  CONQUEEOE  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

the  Conquest,  and  though  fairly  to  be  described  as  an 
old  man,  the  term  "  le  viel "  may  be  held  to  signify 
simply  "  the  senior,"  as  it  appears  that  there  were 
three  of  the  family  of  Gournay  present  at  Hastings, 
viz.,  Hue  de  Gournay,  the  Sire  de  Brai  le  Comte,  and 
the  Seigneur  de  Gournay. 

Hugh  de  Gournay,  the  second  of  that  name,  would 
be  the  Seigneur  de  Gournay  at  that  period,  and  Hue 
de  Gournay  his  son  the  third  of  the  name,  who 
married  Basilia,  daughter  of  Gerrard  Flaitel,  sister  of 
the  wife  of  "Walter  Giffard,  1st  Earl  of  Buckingham, 
and  widow  of  Kaoul  de  Gacd  Hugh,  his  father, 
Seigneur  de  Gournay,  is  described  by  Wace  as  being 
accompanied  at  Senlac  by  a  strong  force  of  his  men  of 
Brai,  and  doing  much  execution  on  the  English. 

He  is  said  by  the  Norman  chroniclers  to  have  been 
mortally  wounded  in  a  battle  at  Cardiff  in  1074,  and 
carried  to  Normandy,  where  he  died.  There  is, 
however,  considerable  doubt  about  their  account  of 
this  battle,  as  it  is  clear  that  several  persons  said  to 
have  been  engaged  or  slain  in  it  were  either  deceased 
long  prior  to  it,  or  could  not  possibly  have  been 
present ;  but  more  of  that  anon. 

The  first  of  the  family  of  Gournay  is  presumed  to 
have  been  a  follower  of  Kalf  or  Kollo,  to  whom,  after 
the  settlement  of  the  Norsemen  in  Neustria,  was 


HUGH  DE  GOUENAY.  Ill 

allotted  part  of  the  district  of  Le  Brai,  the  principal 
places  in  which  were  Gournay,  La  Ferte',  Lions,  Charle- 
val,  and  Fleury. 

La  Fert^  was  assigned  to  a  younger  branch  of  the 
house  of  Gournay  before  the  Conquest.  Hugh,  the  son 
of  Eudes,  is  reported  to  have  been  the  first  to  make 
Gournay  a  place  of  strength.  The  ancient  records  of 
the  family  ascribe  to  him  the  erection  of  a  citadel 
surrounded  by  a  triple  wall  and  fosse,  and  further 
secured  by  a  tower  named  after  him,  "  La  Tour  Hue," 
which  was  standing  as  late  as  the  beginning  of  the 
17th  century.  Such  was  the  reputed  strength  of 
this  fortress  that  a  rhyming  chronicler  (William  de 
Brito)  declares  it  was  able  to  resist  a  hostile  attack 
undefended  by  a  single  soldier.  A  description  magni- 
ficent enough  to  take  rank  amongst  the  most  amusing 
exaggerations  of  our  transatlantic  brethren. 

Hugh  was  succeeded  by  a  Renaud  de  Gournay,  the 
first  of  the  family  mentioned  in  any  charter,  who  by 
his  wife  Alberada  had  two  sons,  Hugh  and  Gautier, 
the  elder  becoming  Lord  of  Gournay,  and  the  younger 
of  La  Fertd-en-Brai,  of  which  he  founded  the  Priory 
circa  990,  by  command  or  request  of  his  brother 
Hugh,  and  for  the  health  of  the  souls  of  Renaud  and 
Alberada,  their  father  and  mother. 

This  division  of  the  great  fief  was  according  to  a 


112         THE  CONQUEKOK  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

Norman  custom  called  Paragium,  from  the  younger 
son  being  put  " pari  conditione  "  with  the  elder.  The 
old  "  Coutume  de  Normandie  "  gives  this  definition  of 
it :  "La  tenure  par  parage  est  quand  cil  qui  tient  et 
cil  de  qui  il  tient  sont  pers  es  parties  de  1'heritages  qui 
descend  de  leurs  ancesseurs."  The  younger  son  in 
such  case  was  not  the  feudal  vassal  of  the  elder,  but 
held  his  portion  of  the  fief  by  equal  tenure,  the  elder, 
however,  doing  homage  to  the  over-lord  for  the  whole 
fief  to  the  seventh  generation,  when  all  affinity  was 
supposed  to  cease. 

I  have  made  this  little  digression,  because  I  consider 
such  explanations  of  ancient  customs  most  important 
to  readers  of  history,  as  accounting  for  acts  and 
circumstances  otherwise  inexplicable  or  liable  to  mis- 
interpretation and  confusion,  as  in  the  instance  I  have 
already  pointed  out  in  my  notice  of  Aimeri  de  Thouars 
(vol.  i.,  p.  242). 

Hugh  II.,  Seigneur  de  Gournay,  most  probably  the 
son  of  the  former  Hugh,  is  the  personage  I  have 
already  mentioned  as  believed  to  be  "  the  -old  Hue  " 
of  Wace's  Chronicle,  and  the  Hugo  Miles  who  autho- 
rised the  gift  of  the  land  of  Calvelville  to  the  Abbey 
of  Montvilliers  by  William  while  Count  of  the 
Hiemois. 

Mr.  Daniel  Gurney,  in  the  first  volume  of  his  sump- 


HUGH  DE  GOUKNAY.  113 

tuous  work,  "  The  Record  of  the  House  of  Gournay," 
remarks  in  his  notice  of  this  charter  that  Calvelville,  it 
seems  likely,  is  the  modern  Conteville,  so  called  from 
this  donation  by  William  the  Count.  If  there  were 
any  facts  to  be  adduced  in  support  of  this  otherwise 
mere  fancy,  they  would  be  very  important,  inasmuch 
as  they  would  enlighten  us  respecting  the  parentage 
and  position  of  Herluin  de  Conteville,  whose  name  has 
been  preserved  to  us  from  the  accident  of  his  being 
"  le  mari  de  sa  femme."  Beatrice,  Abbess  of  Mont- 
villiers,  was  aunt  to  Robert  Duke  of  Normandy, 
William's  father,  and  William  Malet,  as  we  have 
seen,  had  power  to  give  Conteville  to  the  Abbey  of 
Bee. 

This  second  Hugh  was  one  of  the  Norman  leaders 
of  the  fleet  of  forty  ships  which  accompanied  Edward 
the  Saxon  Prince,  son  of  King  Ethelred,  to  England 
in  1035,  when,  on  the  death  of  Knute,  he  made  an 
attempt  to  recover  the  kingdom.  The  expedition 
sailed  from  Barfleur,  and  landed  at  Southampton,  but 
was  ill  recaived  by  the  English,  who  had  espoused  the 
cause  of  Harold  Harefoot.  Edward,  seeing  the  dis- 
position of  the  country,  returned  with  his  fleet  to 
Barfleur,  more  fortunate  than  his  brother  Alfred,  who, 
at  the  same  time  making  a  descent  on  Dover,  was 
taken  prisoner  by  Earl  Godwin,  confined  in  the 

VOL.  II.  I 


114         THE  CONQUEEOR  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

Monastery  of  Ely,  had  his  eyes  put  out,  and  died 
shortly  afterwards. 

Subsequently  we  find  Hugh  de  Gournay,  one  of  the 
victors  in  the  battle  of  Mortemer,  A.D.  1054,  and 
finally  at  Hastings  in  1066,  in  company  with  his  son 
Hugh,  and  his  relative,  the  "  Sire  de  Brai,"  a  title  by 
which  the  latter  Hugh  was  distinguished  in  some 
rolls,  and  may  in  this  instance  have  been  appropriated 
to  his  son  Gerrard.  I  have  already  alluded  to  the 
reported  death  of  the  elder  Hugh  from  wounds 
received  in  the  mysterious  battle  of  Cardiff,  A.D.  1074, 
and  will  give  my  reasons  for  discrediting  that  account. 
By  Monsieur  le  Prevost  he  is  said  to  have  become  a 
monk  at  Bee ;  but  it  is  suggested  that  the  Hugh  de 
Gournay  recorded  to  have  done  so,  was  his  son 
Hugh,  third  husband  of  Basilia  Flaitel,  who  also 
retired  from  the  world,  and  ended  her  days  there, 
together  with  her  niece  Anfride,  and  Eva,  wife  of 
William  Crispin. 

The  Sire  de  la  Ferte  mentioned  by  Wace  (Rom.  de 
Ron,  1. 13,710)  was  not  one  of  the  Gournay  family,  the 
last  of  that  branch,  lords  of  La  Ferte-en-Bray,  having 
died  without  issue  a  monk  in  the  Abbey  of  St.  Ouen 
at  Eouen  previous  to  the  invasion. 

And  now  for  a  word  or  two  about  the  battle  of 
Cardiff.  Mr.  Daniel  Gurney  had  his  attention  drawn  to 


HUGH  DE  GOUENAY.  115 

this  subject  by  the  inclusion  of  the  name  of  Hugh  de 
Gournay  amongst  the  personages  connected  with  it, 
and  following  a  French  account  in  "L'Histoire  et 
Chronique  de  Normandie,"  printed  at  Rouen  by 
Megissier  in  1610,  he  very  naturally  questioned  the 
fact  of  there  ever  having  been  such  a  battle  at  Cardiff 
at  all. 

Having  had  occasion  to  examine  this  subject  upon 
other  grounds  some  years  ago,  I  went  deeper  into  it 
than  my  amiable  friend  had  done,  and  believe  I  dis- 
covered a  substratum  of  truth  on  which  a  story  irre- 
concilable with  established  facts  had  been  constructed. 

The  Norman  Chronicle  describes  the  battle  as 
having  occurred  in  1074,  during  the  lifetime  of  the 
Conqueror,  and  states  that  the  Danes  were  met  by 
"  Guilhaume  le  fils  Auber  "  (who  was  slain  in  Flanders 
in  1071),  Guilhaume  le  Roux,  the  King's  son  (at  that 
time  a  boy  of  fourteen),  Roger  de  Montgomeri,  Hue 
de  Mortemer,  and  the  Comte  de  Vennes  ;  that  the 
Normans  were  victorious,  but  suffered  great  loss. 
That  "  Guilhaume  le  Roux  was  taken  prisoner ; "  that 
"Arnoult  de  Harcourt,"  "Roger  de  Montgomeri," 
"  Neil  le  Vicomte,"  "  Guilhaume  le  fils  Auber,"  and 
many  others  were  killed  and  buried  on  the  spot,  and 
"  Hue  de  Gournay  "  and  the  "  Comte  d'Evreux  "  were 
carried,  desperately  wounded,  into  Normandy,  where 

I  2 


116         THE  COXQUEEOE  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

they  died  soon  afterwards ;  winding  up  with  the  infor- 
mation that  Odo,  Bishop  of  Bayeux,  and  the  Comte 
de  Vennes  retired  after  the  battle  with  the  remainder 
of  their  forces  to  Caerleon. 

That  this  account  is  a  jumble  of  two  or  three 
separate  actions  is  evident  from  the  names  introduced 
in  it.  The  Comte  de  Vennes  was  Count  Brian  of 
Brittany,  who  defeated  the  two  sons  of  Harold  and 
their  Irish  allies  in  1069.  Odo,  Bishop  of  Bayeux, 
was  in  arms  against  the  Earls  of  Norfolk  and  Here- 
ford in  1074,  and  the  battle  of  Cardiff,  according  to 
the  Welsh  Chronicler,  was  fought  some  twenty  years 
later,  when  "  Guilhaume  le  Eoux  "  was  king,  and  had 
been  lying  sick  at  Gloucester. 

In  Dr.  Powell's  continuation  of  Humphrey  Lloyd's 
description  of  Wales,  translated  from  the  Welsh,  and 
published  in  1584,  it  is  recorded  under  the  date  of 
1094  :  "About  this  time  Roger  Montgomery,  Earl  of 
Salop  and  Arundell,  William  Fitz-Eustace,  Earl  of 
Gloucester,  Arnold  de  Harcourt  and  Neale  le  Vicount 
were  slain  between  Cardiff  and  Brecknock  by  the 
Welshmen  ;  also  Walter  Evereux,  Earl  of  Sarum, 
and  Hugh  Earl  Gourney  were  there  hurt,  and  died 
after  in  Normandy" 

That  the  French  account  is  a  garbled  version  of  the 
above  is  obvious  on  comparison  of  the  names  and 


IIUGII  DE  GOUENAY.  117 

words  I  have  put  in  italics  with  those  in  the 
"Chronique  de  Normandie,"  where  they  are  almost 
literally  translated  ;  but  William  Fitz  Eustace  trans- 
formed into  William  Fitz  Osbern,  and  Walter  Evreux 
into  the  Comte  d' Evreux. 

Mr.  Gurney,  who  appears  not  to  have  known  of 
this  curious  record,  sufHcicutly  demolished  the  French 
account  by  comparing  the  dates  of  the  deaths  of  the 
combatants  with  that  given  of  the  battle,  and  a 
similar  test  applied  to  the  Welsh  one  elicits  the  im- 
portant fact,  that  of  the  three  well-known  individuals 
who  are  named  as  having  fallen  in  the  battle  of 
Cardiff,  or  died  in  Normandy  from  the  wounds  they 
received  in  it,  nothing  whatever  is  recorded  which  can 
fairly  be  said  to  invalidate  the  statement.  None  are 
known  to  have  survived  that  period,  and  their  deaths 
arc  not  accounted  for  in  any  other  manner. 

Roger  de  Montgomeri,  the  most  important  person 
of  the  group,  was,  as  I  have  already  shown,  buried 
at  that  precise  date,  the  cause  of  death  not  being 
stated. 

Monsieur  de  Gerville  in  his  notice  of  the  Lords  of 
Nehou  mentions  the  report  that  Neel  Vicomte  de 
Saint-Sauveur  was  killed  at  Cardiff  in  1074,  but 
corrects  the  date,  and  says  he  died  in  1092,  and 
that  Geoffrey  de  Mowbray  buried  him  at  Coutances, 


118         THE  CONQUEEOE  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

confounding  him  with  his  successor.  As  for  Hugh 
de  Gournay,  in  whom  at  this  moment  we  are  more 
specially  interested,  the  last  we  hear  of  him  is  that  he 
became  a  monk  in  Normandy,  where  he  died  some 
time  after  1085  ;  but  nothing  is  positively  known 
how  long  after,  or  what  was  the  cause  of  his  death, 
and  the  assertion  that  he  "  was  hurt "  at  Cardiff, 
"  and  died  after  in  Normandy,"  is  quite  reconcilable 
with  the  fact,  if  it  be  one,  that  he  became  a  monk 
there,  as  it  was  a  common  practice  in  those  days  for  a 
warrior  to  assume  the  monastic  habit  even  in  articulo 
mortis ;  and  the  same  observation  applies  to  Roger  de 
Montgomeri,  who  died  a  monk  at  Shrewsbury  in 
1094. 

Of  Arnould  de  Harcourt,  named  in  both  accounts, 
I  have  found  nothing  to  affect  the  question  either 
way,  and  we  have  therefore  only  Walter  Evreux, 
Earl  of  Sarum,  and  William  Fitz  Eustace,  Earl  of 
Gloucester,  to  dispose  of. 

That  there  is  evidence  of  the  existence  of  a  William 
Fitz  Eustace,  probably  a  son  of  Eustace,  Count  of 
Boulogne,  I  demonstrated  some  years  ago  at 
Cirencester.*  That  there  ever  was  a  Walter 

*  Vide  William  of  Tyre.  Bohcmond,  Prince  of  Antioch,  in  a  letter 
to  his  brother  Eoger,  mentions  another  son  of  Eustace  named  Hugo. 
Sir  H.  Ellis,  in  his  Introduction  to  Domesday,  also  mentions  a  charter 
of  William,  the  son  of  Eustace,  in  the  British  Museum. 


HUGH  DE  GOUENAY.  119 

Evreux,  Earl  of  Sarum,  is  still  an  open  question, 
which  I  am  not  warranted  in  discussing  here.  We 
know  Hugh  was  not  Earl  of  Gournay ;  but  that  does 
not  destroy  his  identity.  In  the  absence  of  any  posi- 
tive authority,  the  simple  statement  of  the  Welsh 
Chronicler,  uncontradicted  in  any  important  point,  and 
throwing  a  light  upon  several  obscure  points  of  his- 
tory and  biography,  deserves  respectful  consideration. 
Although  recorded  under  the  year  1094,  it  does  not 
fix  the  precise  date  of  the  battle.  The  words  are 
"  about  this  time!'  There  is  nothing,  therefore,  to 
prevent  our  considering  it  to  have  been  fought  in 
1092,  or  before  March,  1093,  which  would  reconcile 
every  apparent  discrepancy. 


CHAPTER  V. 


WILLIAM  DE  MOHUN. 
EUDO  AL  CHAPEL. 
EUDO  DAPIFER. 


FULK  D  AUNOU. 
RICHARD  DE  NEVIL. 


WILLIAM  DE  MOHUN. 

THIS  ancestor  of  the  first  Earls  of  Somerset  is  named 
by  AVace  amongst  the  Norman  barons  at  Senlac,  but 
simply  as  "  le  Viel  Willame  cle  Moion  "  (Rom.  de  Rou, 
1.  13,620).  Deriving  his  name  from  a  vill  three 
leagues  south  of  St.  L6,  where  the  remains  of  the 
castle  were  recently  to  be  seen,  all  we  learn  of  him 
from  the  rhyming  chronicler  is  that  he  had  with  him 
many  companions,  "  ont  avec  li  maint  compagnon ; " 
but  if  we  were  to  give  any  credit  to  a  list  handed  down 
to  us  by  Leland  ("  Collectanea  de  Rebus  Britannicis," 
Ed.  Hearne,  vol.  i.,  p.  202),  he  had  a  following  worthy 
of  an  emperor,  and  deserved  the  description  bestowed 
upon  him  by  the  writer,  viz.,  "  le  plus  noble  de  tout 
1'oste."  This  William  de  Moion,  he  tells  us,  had  in  his 
train  all  the  great  lords  following,  as  it  is  written  in 


WILLIAM  DE  MOHUN.  121 

the  book  of  the  Conquerors.  "  To  wit :  Eaoul  Taisson 
dc  Cingueleiz,  Roger  Marmion  le  Viel,  Monsieur  Nel 
de  Sein  Saviour,  Raoul  de  Gail,  who  was  a  Breton, 
Avenel  de  Giars,  Hubert  Paignel,  Robert  Ber- 
thram,  Raol  the  Archer  de  Va1,  and  the  Sire  de  Bricoil, 
the  Sires  de  Sole  and  de  Sereval,  the  Sires  de  St.  Jean 
and  de  Breal,  the  Sire  de  Breus  and  two  hundred  of  his 
men,  the  Sires  de  St.  Sen  and  the  Sires  de  Cuallic,  the 
Sires  de  Cenullie  and  the  Sire  de  Basqueville,  the  Sires 
de  Praels  and  the  Sires  de  Souiz,  the  Sires  de  Saiiitels 
and  the  Sires  de  Vieutz  Moley,  the  Sires  de  Monceals 
and  the  Sires  de  Pacie,  the  seneschals  of  Corcye  and 
the  Sires  de  Lacye,  the  Sires  de  Gacre  and  the  Sires  de 
Soillie,  the  Sires  de  Sacre,  the  Sires  de  Vaacre,  the  Sires 
de  Torneor,  and  the  Sires  de  Praerers,  William  de 
Columbieres  and  Gilbert  Dasmeres  le  Veil,  the  Sires 
of  Chaaiones,  the  Sires  of  Coismicrcs  le  Veil,  Hugh  de 
Bullebek,  Richard  Orbec,  the  Sires  of  Bonesboz  and 
the  Sires  de  Sap,  the  Sires  de  Gloz  and  the  Sires  de 
Tregoz,  the  Sires  de  Monfichet  and  Hugh  Bigot,  the 
Sires  de  Vitrie  and  the  Sires  Durmie,  the  Sires  de 
Moubrai  and  the  Sires  de  Saie,  the  Sires  de  la  Fert  and 
the  Sire  Boteuilam,  the  Sire  Troselet  and  William 
Patrick  de  la  Lande,  Monsieur  Hugh  de  Mortimer  and 
the  Sires  Damyler,  the  Sires  de  Dunebek  and  the 
Sires  de  St.  Clere  and  Robert  Fitz-Herveis,  who  was 


122         THE  CONQUEKOR  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

killed  in  the  battle."  And  this  astounding  catalogue 
is  wound  up  by  the  repeated  assurance  that  "  all  the 
above-named  seigneurs  were  in  the  retinue  of  Monsier 
de  Moion  as  aforesaid." 

I  have  copied  the  list  in  order  that  whoever  pleases 
may  satisfy  himself,  as  I  have  done,  respecting  its 
origin.  It  is  in  fact  nothing  more  nor  less  than 
a  copy  of  all  the  names  mentioned  in  the  "Roman 
de  Rou,"  from  line  13,621  to  line  13,761,  just  as  they 
follow  each  other  in  the  poem  ;  and  the  assertion  that 
all  these  noble  Normans  were  "a  la  retennaunce  de 
Monsier  Moion/'  resulted  from  the  curious  blunder 
of  the  copyist,  who  considered  the  lines 

"  Le  Viel  Willame  de  Moion 
Ont  avec  li  maint  compagnon," 

had  reference  to  the  knights  and  barons  named  imme- 
diately afterwards,  all  of  whom  he  pressed  into  the 
service,  and  would  no  doubt  have  included  half  the 
army  if  an  unmistakable  full  stop  and  change  of 
subject  had  not  pulled  him  up  short  with  the  death  of 
Robert  Fitz  Erneis,  which  he  writes  incorrectly 
Herveis.  This  expose'  is  necessary  to  prevent  any 
one  from  imagining  that  this  list  is  extracted  from 
some  independent  authority.  "Le  livre  des  Con- 
querors "  turns  out  to  be  "  Le  Roman  de  Rou." 
The  services  of  "  Monsier  de  Moion  "  were,  however, 


WILLIAM  DE  MOIIUN.  123 

sufficiently  appreciated  to  obtain  for  him  the  grant 
of  the  lordships  of  Clchangre,  in  the  county  of 
Devon,  and  Button,  in  the  county  of  Wilts,  with 
fifty-five  others  in  the  county  of  Somerset ;  Dunster 
Castle  being  apparently  his  caput  baronise  and  prin- 
cipal residence,  near  which  he  founded  a  priory  and 
made  it  a  cell  to  that  at  Bath,  giving  to  it  the  Church 
of  St.  George  in  Dunster,  as  also  the  lordship  of 
Alcombe,  with  the  tithes  of  all  his  vineyards  and 
arable  lauds  at  Dunster  and  Karampton. 

Of  his  age  at  the  time  of  the  Conquest  we  have  no 
means  of  judging.  As  I  have  previously  remarked, 
the  epithet  "  le  Viel"  may  simply  signify  "  the  elder," 
and  not  imply  "  old  "  in  the  fullest  sense  of  the  word. 

Writing  in  the  time  of  his  sou,  Wace  would  natu- 
rally so  distinguish  him.  We  do  so  in  similar  cases 
in  the  present  day.  He  appears  to  have  survived  the 
Conqueror,  and  was  buried  in  the  Priory  of  Bath.  Of 
his  parentage  we  are  equally  ignorant.  For  all  I 
know,  he  may  have  been  descended  from  one  of  the 
same  family  as  Kaoul,  surnamed  Mouin,  the  reported 
assassin  of  Robert,  the  Conqueror's  father;  for  the 
name  is  spelt  indifferently  Moion,  Moun,  and  Moyne. 

By  his  wife,  whoever  she  may  have  been,  he  had  a 
son  named  after  him  ;  and  his  son,  a  third  William, 
was  the  first  Earl  of  Somerset.  In  his  foundation 


124         THE  CONQUEROR  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

charter  of  the  priory  at  Bruton  he  distinctly  calls 
himself  "Willielmus  cle  Moyne,  comes  Somerset- 
ensis."  From  the  time  of  the  Conquest  to  that  of 
this  Earl,  history  is  silent  respecting  the  deeds  of  the 
De  Mohuns. 

EUDO  AL  CHAPEL. 

There  are  some  doubts  as  to  whom  Wace  alludes  as 
"  le  Sire  de  la  Haie,"  whom  he  describes  as  charging 
impetuously  at  Senlac,  neither  sparing  nor  pitying 
any,  dealing  death  on  all  he  encountered,  inflicting 
wounds  which  no  skill  could  cure. 

Eudo,  or,  as  Wace  calls  him  in  a  previous  portion 
of  his  Eoman,  Iwun  al  Chapel,  was  the  eldest  son 
of  Turstain  Haldub  (Halduc,  and  Haralduc  as  it 
is  indifferently  written)  by  Emma  or  Anna  his  wife, 
and  subscribes  himself  "  Eudo  Haldub  "  in  a  charter 
A.D.  1074.  At  the  time  of  the  Conquest  he  was  head 
of  the  house  of  Haie-du-Puits,  in  the  Cotentin, 
near  the  Abbey  of  1'Essay,  founded  by  Turstain  (also 
called  Richard)  his  father. 

Eudo  married  Muriel,  a  daughter  of  Heiiuin  de 
Conteville  and  Herleve,  and  sister  of  the  half  blood 
to  the  Conqueror,  who  we  have  seen  summoned  him 
to  attend  the  family  council  held  previous  to  the 
general  assembly  at  Lillebonne  in  1066,  together  with 


ETJDO  AL  CHAPEL. 


Eudo's  brothers-in-law,  Bishop  Oclo  and  Robert  Comte 
de  Mortain  (vol.  i.,  p.  51).  It  can  scarcely  be  doubted, 
therefore,  that  he  accompanied  them  to  England,  and 
was  present  in  the  battle.  Mr.  Taylor  inclines  to  the 
opinion  of  M.  le  Prevost,  that  the  Sire  de  la  Haie  of 
AVace  was  Ralph  de  la  Haie,  seneschal  at  that  period 
to  Robert  Comte  de  Mortain,  and  it  is  of  course 
probable  that  he  might  have  followed  his  lord  to  Eng- 
land ;  but  Robert  de  la  Haie,  son  of  the  above  Ralph, 
only  became  Lord  of  Halnac  in  Sussex  by  gift  of  King 
Henry  L,  and  the  confusion  between  Eudo  al  Chapel 
and  Eudo  Dapifer,  son  of  Hubert  de  Rie,  which  com- 
menced with  Orderic,  has  not  been  cleared  up  by 
either  the  French  or  the  English  annotators  of  Wace. 

Mr.  Stapleton,  however,  in  his  Notes  on  the  Norman 
Rolls  of  the  Exchequer,  has  adduced  evidence  that 
dissipates  the  doubts  expressed  by  Mr.  Taylor  respect- 
ing the  precise  way  in  which  the  Haies  succeeded  to 
Eudo  cum  Capello.  Robert,  son  of  Ralph  de  la 
Haie,  Dapifer  to  Robert  Count  of  Mortain,  married 
Muriel,  the  daughter  and  heir  of  Eudo.  The  charter 
quoted  by  Mr.  Taylor  from  Gallia  Christiana,  which 
describes  Robert  de  Haie,  sou  of  Ralph,  seneschal  to 
Robert  Comte  de  Mortain,  as  the  grandson  (nepos) 
of  Eudo,  Dapifer  to  King  William,  has  contributed 
to  the  confusion,  as  Robert  de  Haie  was  son-in-law  to 


126         THE  CONQUEROR  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

Eudo  al  Chapel,  Dapifer  to  William  Duke  of  Nor- 
mandy, and  in  no  way  appears  related  to  Eudo,  son 
of  Hubert  de  Rie,  Dapifer  to  the  King  of  England, 
with  whom  it  seems  to  have  been  his  fate  to  be  con- 
founded. 

Kobert's  mother,  wife  of  Ealph,  appears  to  have 
been  Oliva,  a  daughter  of  William  de  Albini  Pincerna, 
the  second  of  that  name. 

EUDO  DAPIFER. 

There  is  no  satisfactory  evidence  of  this  celebrated 
Norman  having  fought  at  Senlac,  although  it  has 
been  suggested  that  Wace  may  have  designated  him 
as  the  Sire  de  Preaux — "  Gil  de  Praels,"  of  which 
Eudo  was  undoubtedly  possessed  in  1070.  M.  le 
Provost,  therefore,  who  himself  furnishes  us  with  this 
information,  for  which  he  acknowledges  his  obligation 
to  M.  Renault,  is  rather  inconsistent  in  at  the  same 
time  charging  the  poor  poet  with  "  a  gross  ana- 
chronism," on  the  ground  that  the  house  of  Preaux 
was  a  junior  branch  of  the  family  of  Cailli,  which  had 
only  just  been  detached  from  it  at  the  period  Wace 
wrote,  A.D.  1160;  for  if  the  evidence  ("titre")  dis- 
covered by  M.  He'nault  be  trustworthy,  Eudo  Sire  de 
Pre*aux  in  1070  may  well  have  been  so  four  years 
previously,  and  at  any  rate  we  know  that  he  died  in 


EUDO  DAPIFER.  127 


his  Castle  of  Pre'aux  in  1120,  which  is  of  itself  a 
sufficient  answer  to  M.  le  Prevost's  objection,  and  as 
he  himself  records  that  fact,  his  note  on  the  subject  * 
is  incomprehensible. 

But  to  our  memoir.  This  Eudo  was  the  fourth  son 
of  Hubert  de  Hie,  the  loyal  vassal  who  saved  the  life 
of  Duke  William  in  his  flight  from  Valognes  by 
mounting  him  on  a  fresh  horse,  and  misleading  his 
pursuers,  who  were  close  upon  his  heels  (vide  vol.  i., 
p.  23).  Three  of  Hubert's  four  sons  were  directed  by 
him  to  escort  the  Duke,  and  not  leave  him  till  he  was 
safe  in  Falaise.  Whether  Eudo  was  one  of  the  three 
we  know  not,  as  Orderic  does  not  name  them  ;  but  as 
they  must  all  have  been  young  at  that  time,  and  Eudo 
the  youngest  of  the  four,  it  is  probable  that  Ralph, 
Hubert,  and  Adam  were  the  guides  and  guardians 
of  their  youthful  prince,  themselves  not  much  his 
seniors. 

Whether  all  four  were  in  the  Conqueror's  army  we 
have  at  present  no  means  of  ascertaining,  but  we  find 
them  all  in  England,  and,  if  we  may  trust  our 
authority,  their  father  also  immediately  after  William 
was  possessed  of  the  crown.  | 


*  Roman  de  Eou.     Tom.  ii.,  p.  250. 

\  History  of  the  foundation  of  St.  Peter's,  Colchester.    Cotton,  MS. 
Nero,  D  8. 


128         THE  CONQUEEOE,  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

The  account  from  which  we  derive  it  is  rather 
apocryphal.  In  the  time  of  King  Edward  the 
Confessor,  we  are  told,  Hubert  de  Kie,  a  trusty 
servant  to  William  Duke  of  Normandy,  being  by  him 
sent  on  a  mission  to  that  king  when  he  lay  on  his 
death-bed,  came  with  a  pompous  equipage*  into 
England,  and  after  conference  with  King  Edward, 
returned  to  the  Duke  with  certain  tokens  by  which  he 
was  declared  by  that  King  his  heir  to  the  crown  of 
this  realm,  viz.,  a  sword,  in  the  belt  whereof  were 
enclosed  the  relics  of  some  saints,  a  hunter's  horn  of 
gold  and  the  head  of  a  mighty  stag,  for  which  service 
the  Duke  promised  Hubert  he  should  be  steward  of  his 
household. 

But,  continues  the  writer,  when  Duke  William  had 
got  the  crown,  fearing  that  disturbances  might  arise  in 
Normandy,  and  well  weighing  the  sagacity  in  counsel 
and  dexterity  in  action  of  this  Hubert,  he  sent  him 
thither  to  have  an  eye  to  that  danger,  and  soon  after 
him  his  sons  Ralph,  whom  he  had  made  Castellan  of 
Nottingham,  Hubert,  governor  of  the  Castle  of 
Norwich,  and  Adam,  to  whom  he  had  given  large 
possessions  in  Kent ;  the  which  Adam  was  first 

*  "  Cum  pompa  magna,  equis  phaleratis  et  frematu  terribilibus, 
hominibus  serico  indutis  et  colore  vestrum  spectabilis."  Such  an 
embassy  would  scarcely  have  escaped  the  notice  of  the  Saxon 
chroniclers. 


EUDO  DAPIFER. 


appointed  by  the  King  to  be  one  of  the  commissioners 
for  the  compilation  of  the  great  survey,  1085. 

But  Eudo,  the  fourth  son,  continuing  here  in  King 
William's  service,  obtained  from  him  divers  lordships 
in  sundry  counties,  viz.,  in  Essex  twenty-five,  in 
Hertfordshire  seven,  in  Berkshire  one,  in  Bedfordshire 
twelve,  in  Norfolk  nine,  and  in  Suffolk  ten  ;  and 
personally  attending  the  court  it  so  happened  that 
William  Fitz  Osbern,  then  steward  of  the  household, 
had  set  before  the  King  the  flesh  of  a  crane  scarce  half 
roasted,  whereat  the  King  took  such  offence  as  that  he 
lifted  up  his  fist  and  had  stricken  him  fiercely  but 
that  Eudo  bore  (warded  off)  the  blow.  Whereupon 
Fitz  Osbern  grew  so  displeased  as  that  he  quitted  his 
office,  desiring  that  Eudo  might  have  it.  To  which 
request  the  King,  as  well  for  his  father  Hubert's 
demerits  and  his  own,  at  the  desire  of  Fitz  Osbern 
readily  yielded.  Of  this  story,  which  I  have  quoted 
nearly  verbatim  from  Dugdale,*  my  readers  may 
believe  as  little  as  they  please  respecting  the  embassy  of 
Hubert  to  England,  and  the  gifts  and  bequest  of  Edward 
the  Confessor,  which  if  true  would  not  have  been  kept 
secret  by  William,  whose  special  interest  it  was  to  pro- 
mulgate the  dying  declaration  of  the  King  of  England. 

*  Baronage,  vol.  i.  p.  109.     The  detailed  account  is  to  be  found  in. 
his  Monasticon,  vol.  ii.  p.  889. 

VOL.  n.  K 


130         THE  CONQUEROK  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

The  anecdote  about  the  ill-roasted  crane  is  not  im- 
probable, and  is  at  least  characteristic,  and  may  have 
partly  influenced  the  Conqueror  in  his  decision  to  send 
Fitz  Osbern  to  Normandy  in  1070  (vide  vol.  i.  p.  178), 
for  he  could  ill  spare  at  any  time  the  personal 
attendance  of  a  trustworthy  "  cousin  and  councillor," 
like  the  newly  created  Earl  of  Hereford. 

It  is  clear,  however,  that  Eudo  became  Dapifer  after 
the  departure  of  the  Earl  for  Normandy,  and  for 
seventeen  years  enjoyed  the  favour  of  his  sovereign, 
and  being  in  attendance  on  the  dying  Conqueror  at 
Rouen,  was  mainly  instrumental  to  the  securing 
of  the  crown  to  Rufus,  whom  he  accompanied  to 
England,  and  by  his  representations  obtained  from 
William  de  Pont  arch  e  the  keys  of  the  treasury  at 
Winchester,  wherein  the  regalia,  as  well  as  the 
money,  was  deposited.  Thence  he  hastened  to  Dover, 
.and  bound  the  governor  of  the  castle  by  a  solemn 
oath  that  he  would  not  yield  it  to  any  one  but  by  his 
advice. 

Pevensey,  Hastings,  and  other  maritime  strong- 
holds he  managed  to  secure  in  like  manner,  pretending 
that  the  King,  whose  death  was  still  rumoured  in 
secret,  would  stay  longer  in  Normandy,  and  desired  to 
have  good  assurances  of  the  safety  of  his  castles  in 
England  from  himself,  his  then  steward. 


EUDO  DAPIFEE.  131 


Returning  to  Winchester  he  publicly  announced 
the  death  of  the  Conqueror  ;  so,  while  the  nobles  were 
consulting  together  in  Normandy  respecting  the 
succession,  William  II.,  by  Eudo's  policy,  was  pro- 
claimed King  in  England. 

His  great  service  was  duly  appreciated  by  Rufus,  in 
whose  favour  he  remained  during  his  whole  reign,  and 
in  1096-7  founded  the  Church  of  St.  Peter's  at 
Colchester,  he  himself  laying  the  first  stone,  Rohesia, 
his  wife,  the  second,  and  Gilbert  Fitz  Richard  de  Clare, 
her  brother,  the  third. 

On  the  death  of  Rufus  he  was  coldly  looked  upon 
by  the  new  King,  Henry,  who  suspected  him  of  being 
a  partisan  of  his  brother  Robert  Court-heuse,  but  sub- 
sequently was  reconciled  to  him  and  visited  him  when 
he  was  dying  in  his  Castle  of  Preaux,  and  advised  him 
as  to  the  disposition  of  his  temporal  estates. 

To  his  Abbey  at  Colchester,  wherein  he  desired  to  be 
buried,  he  bequeathed  one  hundred  pounds  in  money, 
his  gold  ring  with  a  topaz,  a  standing  cup  and  cover 
f  adorned  with  plates  of  gold,  his  horse  and  a  mule,  and 
in  addition  to  the  lands  he  had  endowed  it  with  on 
its  foundation,  he  bestowed  on  it  his  manor  of  Bright- 
lingsie. 

His  body  was  brought  over  to  England,  and  accord- 
ing to  the  desire  expressed  in  his  will,  buried  at 

K  2 


132         THE  CONQTJEKOR  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

Colchester  on  the  morrow  preceding   the  kalends  of 
March,  1120  (20th  of  Henry  I.). 

By  his  wife  Rohesia,  daughter  of  Eichard  Fitz 
Gilbert  de  Clare  or  de  Bienfaite,  and  Rohesia,  only 
daughter  of  Walter  Giffard,  the  first  Earl  of  Bucking- 
ham, he  left  issue  one  sole  daughter  and  heir,  named 
Margaret,  married  to  William  de  Mandeville,  and 
mother  of  Geoffrey  de  Mandeville,  first  Earl  of  Essex, 
to  secure  whose  services  King  Stephen  and  the 
Empress  Maude  appear  to  have  bid  against  each  other 
to  a  fabulous  extent.  Dying  excommunicated  for 
outrages  committed  on  the  monks  of  Ramsey,  his 
corpse  was  carried  by  some  Knights  Templars  into  their 
orchard  in  the  Old  Temple  at  London,  arrayed  in  the 
habit  of  the  Order,  and  after  being  enclosed  in  lead, 
hung  on  a  branch  of  a  tree,  where  it  remained  until 
absolution  being  obtained  from  Pope  Alexander,  by 
the  intercession  of  the  Prior  of  Walden,  it  was  taken 
down  and  privately  buried  in  the  porch  of  the  New 
Temple,  where  his  efHgy  is  still  to  be  seen. 

FULK  D'AUNOU. 

"  Oil  ki  ert  Sire  d'Alnou,"  another  of  those  Norman 
seigneurs  Master  Wace  leaves  us  to  identify,  is  gene- 
rally held  to  have  been  Fulk  or  Foulques,  second  son 
of  Baudry  le  Teuton  or  Baldric  the  German,  of  whom 


FULZ  D'AUNOU.  133 


I  have  spoken  in  the  memoir  of  Eichard  de  Courci 
(p.  85),  nephew  of  Fulk,  being  the  son  of  his  brother 
Eobert.  Fulk,  like  the  rest  of  his  brothers,  took 
for  their  surnames  those  of  their  fiefs,  and  Fulk  was  at 
the  time  of  the  Conquest  Lord  of  Aunou-le-Faucon,  or, 
as  Mons.  le  Prevost  instructs  us  we  should  call  it, 
"  le  Foulcon,"  a  designation  it  had  derived  from  the 
repetition  of  the  name  of  Fulk  during  several  genera- 
tions of  its  ancient  possessors.  However  this  may  be, 
I  think  it  probable  that  the  Fulk  d'Aunou  at  the  time 
of  the  Conquest,  and  of  whom  there  are  charters  as 
late  as  1082,  was  a  son  of  the  first  Sire  d'Aunou,  and 
a  cousin  of  Richard  de  Courci  and  Martel  de  Bacque- 
ville,  the  son  of  Nicholas  de  Bacqueville-en-Caux,  the 
eldest  of  Baldric's  children,  which  said  Martel  is  also 
included  by  Wace  in  his  catalogue  of  the  companions 
of  the  Conqueror. 

"  De  Bacqueville  i  fu  Martel." — Ram.  de  Eou,  1.  13,651. 

A  descendant  of  this  Martel  was  Dapifer  to  King 
Stephen  in  1143 ;  but,  although  we  are  told  by 
Orderic  that  the  six  sons  of  Baldric  the  German 
distinguished  themselves  by  their  great  valour  under 
Duke  William,  from  whom  they  received  riches  and 
honours,  and  left  to  their  heirs  vast  possessions  in 
Normandy,  not  a  single  feat  of  arms  or  important 
action  of  any  description  is  recorded  either  of  them  or 


134         THE  CONQUEKOK  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

their  sons,  two,  if  not  three,  of  whom  were  in  the  army 
at  Hastings. 

A  Fulcone  Claudo  is  set  down  in  Taylor's  List  as 
having  contributed  forty  vessels  to  William's  fleet— 

"A  Fulcone  Claudo  xl.  naves ;  " 

but  unless  Claudo  be  a  clerical  error,  and  we  should 
read  Alnou,  I  cannot  venture  to  appropriate  the  gift 
to  the  son  of  Baldric  the  Teuton. 

Another  son  of  that  Baldric  was  the  immediate 
ancestor  of  a  family  unequalled  for  fame  and  power 
by  any  in  England.  The  name  of  Nevil  is  one  of  the 
greatest  inscribed  on  the  roll  of  Anglo-Norman 
chivalry ;  and  though  not  mentioned  by  Orderic, 
Wace,  Guillaume  de  Poitiers,  or  any  other  chronicler 
in  their  list  of  the  companions  ol  the  Conqueror,  we 
cannot,  however  questionable  may  be  the  authority  of 
the  Koll  of  Battle  Abbey,  challenge  the  insertion  of  it 
as  one  of  the  proofs  of  its  inaccuracy. 

RICHAED  DE  NEVIL 

was  the  fourth  son  of  Baldric  the  German,  and  so 
called  from  his  fief  of  Neuville-sur-Tocque,  in  the 
department  of  the  Orne,  the  arrondissement  of  Argen- 
tan,  and  the  canton  of  Gace.  The  name  of  his  wife 
is  as  yet  unknown  to  us,  but  she  bore  to  him  four 
sons,  Gilbert,  Robert,  Richard,  and  Ralph.  Gilbert, 


EICHAED  DE   NEVIL.  135 

apparently  the  eldest,  is  the  "  Gilbert  Normanus " 
traditionally  said  not  only  to  have  come  over  with 
the  Conqueror,  but  to  have  been  the  admiral  of  his 
fleet. 

This  assertion,  apparently  first  made  towards  the 
close  of  the  fifteenth  century,  is  reported  by  Leland  on 
the  authority,  as  he  tells  us,  of  "  a  roulle  of  the 
genealogie  of  the  Erles  of  Westmoreland,"  but  giving 
us  no  idea  of  the  date  of  that  roll  or  the  authorities 
from  which  it  was  compiled.  At  best  it  can  only 
be  looked  upon  as  a  family  tradition  supported,  as  Mr. 
Drummond  appears  to  think,  by  the  device  of  a  ship 
which  is  to  be  seen  on  the  seal  of  his  grand-nephew 
Henry  de  Neville,  preserved  in  the  Duchy  of  Lan- 
caster Office,  and  the  date  of  which  would  be  between 
1199  and  1216. 

My  experience  in  these  matters  induces  me  to  draw 
an  inference  from  this  fact  directly  opposed  to  that  of 
Mr.  Drummond.  It  is  my  belief,  founded  on  the 
many  analogous  examples  I  have  met  with  in  the 
course  of  a  tolerably  long  period  passed  in  such  in- 
vestigations, that  the  tradition  of  Gilbert  de  Neville 
having  been  an  admiral  has  actually  arisen  from  the 
appearance  of  this  ship,  which,  so  far  from  indicating 
any  such  office,  is  nothing  more  than  a  device  alluding 
to  the  family  name  ;  Nef,  in  the  old  French  language 


136         THE  CONQUEROR  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

signifying  a  ship,  and,  therefore,  picturing  the  first 
syllable  of  Nefville,  as  we  find  Muscce  (flies)  upon 
the  old  seals  of  the  Museamps,  and  hosts  of  similar 
and  much  farther-fetched  canting  devices. 

Nearly  all  the  strange  stories  and  bold  assertions  to 
be  met  with  in  the  works  of  early  historical  writers  are 
found  upon  examination  to  have  originated  in  an 
attempt  to  account  for  such  concetti,  and  if  Gilbert's 
uncle  did  really  contribute  so  large  a  contingent  as 
forty  ships  to  the  invading  fleet,  the  supposition  in  the 
present  instance  seems  a  very  natural  one.  Monsieur 
Leopold  de  Lisle,  one  of  the  ablest  antiquaries  in 
France,  has  in  a  recently  compiled  catalogue  which  has 
been  cut  in  the  stone  of  the  western  wall  of  the 
Church  of  Dives,  introduced  a  Richard  de  Neuville 
amongst  the  followers  of  William,  but  no  Gilbert ;  but 
neither  by  him  nor  by  the  Viscount  de  Magny,  who 
has  printed  the  list  with  some  additions  in  his 
"  Nobiliaire  de  Normandie,"  is  any  authority  quoted  in 
support  of  the  statement,  and  they  have  probably  so 
distinguished  him  from  observing  that  the  first  of  the 
name,  and  who  was  a  contemporary  of  Duke  William, 
was  Richard  de  Novavilla,  the  father  of  Gilbert ;  but 
this  Richard  had  also  a  son  named  Richard,  and  that 
some  of  the  sons  or  nephews  of  the  elder  Richard 
were  present  at  Hastings  is  very  probable. 


EIOHAED  DE  NEVIL.  137 

The  name  of  Nevil,  it  has  been  confidently  asserted, 
does  not  appear  in  Domesday.  Like  many  other  con- 
fident assertions,  it  is  untrue.  Dugdale,  who  states 
this,  and  those  who  have  followed  him,  have  overlooked 
the  name  of  Ralph  Nevil,  who  held  Thorpe  of  Turold, 
Abbot  of  Peterborough.  Sir  Henry  Ellis  has  also 
omitted  the  name  in  his  "  Introduction  "  and  indexes. 
It  occurs  however  in  the  Clamores  in  Westriding, 
county  Lincoln,  and  if  Ealph  the  bishop's  man  be 
identical  with  the  Ralph  Nevil  of  Thorpe,  as  there  is 
reason  to  believe,  he  was  tenant  of  several  other  lands 
at  the  time  of  the  survey,  and  we  have  seen  that  the 
youngest  brother  of  Gilbert  was  named  Ralph. 

Be  this  however  as  it  may,  it  is  no  disparagement  to 
the  family  of  Nevil  to  hesitate,  in  the  absence  of 
positive  authority,  to  number  their  direct  ancestor 
amongst  the  leaders  of  that  famous  host ;  for  many  of 
the  greatest  men  in  Normandy  set  down  in  the 
catalogues  as  having  fought  at  Senlac  are  now  known 
to  have  first  set  foot  in  England  after  Duke  William 
had  secured  the  crown. 

Gilbert,  the  traditionary  admiral,  was  the  direct 
progenitor  of  Isabella  de  Neville,  wife  of  Robert  Fitz 
Maldred,  Lord  of  Raby,  and  sole  heir  to  her  brother, 
the  Henry  de  Neville  before  mentioned. 

From  her  son  Geoffrey  Fitz  Maldred,  who  assumed 


138         THE   CONQUEROK  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

his  mother's  name  but  retained  his  father's  arms,, 
sprang  the  magnificent  tree  the  branches  of  which 
are  truly  said  to  have  overshadowed  the  land.  This 
Saxon  line  of  Nevil  has  given  to  England  two  queens, 
a  Princess  of  Wales,  a  mother  of  two  kings,  a  Duke 
of  Bedford,  a  Marquis  of  Montacute,  Earls  of  North- 
umberland, "Westmoreland,  Salisbury,  Kent,  Warwick, 
and  Montacute;  Barons  Nevil,  Furnival,  Latimer, 
Fauconberg,  Montacute,  and  Abergavenny  ;  Duchesses 
of  Norfolk,  Exeter,  York,  Buckingham,  AVarwick, 
Clarence,  and  Bedford ;  a  Marchioness  of  Dorset ; 
Countesses  of  Northumberland,  Westmoreland,  Arun- 
del,  Worcester,  Derby,  Oxford,  Suffolk,  Rutland, 
Exeter,  Bridge  water,  and  Norwich  ;  Baronesses  de  Eos, 
Dacre,  Scrope,  Dovercourt,  Mountjoy,  Spencer,  Fitz 
Hugh,  Harrington,  Hastings,  Comyn,  Willoughby  de 
Broke,  Hunsdon,  Cobham,  Strange,  Montacute,  and 
Lucas ;  nine  Knights  of  the  Garter,  two  Lord  High 
Chancellors,  two  Archbishops  of  York,  a  Bishop  of 
Salisbury,  of  Exeter,  and  of  Durham ! 

I  regret  that  the  nature  and  limits  of  this  work 
debar  me  from  particular  notice  of  many  members  of 
this  wonderful  family,  the  above  remarkable  list  of 
illustrious  descendants  being  of  itself  a  departure  from 
the  rule  I  have  generally  observed  of  confining  my 
annotations  to  the  origin  and  actions  of  the  actual 


RICHARD  DE  NEVIL.  139 

companions  and  contemporaries  of  the  Conqueror. 
Memoirs  of  "  the  Peacock  of  the  North  "  and  "  the 
King-maker"  would  alone  demand  a  volume  for  their 
illustration ;  and  it  is  unnecessary  to  point  out  the 
impossibility  of  doing  similar  justice  to  the  many 
distinguished  descendants  of  other  families  whose 
ancestors  are  recorded  to  have  been  present  with 
Duke  William  at  Hastings,  and  would  have  equal 
claims  on  my  consideration. 


CHAPTER  VI. 


NEEL  DE  SAINT-SAUVEUIK 
WILLIAM  DE  ROUMARE. 
THE     CHAMBERLAIN      OF 

TANKERVILLE. 
URSO  D'ABITOT. 


WALTER    AND    ILBERT     DE 

LACY. 
ROBERT  AND  1VO  DE 

VESCI. 
EUGUENQLF  DE  L'AIGLE. 


NEEL  DE  SAINT-SAUVEUB, 

M.  LE  PROVOST,  the  French  annotator  of  Wace,  is 
disinclined  to  believe  that  Neel  le  Vicomte,  whom  we 
have  seen  in  arms  against  Duke  William  at  the  battle 
of  Val-es-Dunes  (vol.  i.  p.  30),  was  fighting  in  his 
cause  at  Senlac ;  and  Mr.  Taylor,  in  his  English 
version,  does  little  more  than  cite  Le  Prevost's 
opinion. 

The  reasons  of  the  latter  are  of  no  great  weight : 
simply  that  the  presence  of  Neel  at  Hastings  is 
not  vouched  for  by  any  contemporary  authority,  an 
objection  that  would  equally  apply  to  three-fourths  of 


NEEL  DE  SAINT-SAUYEUE.  141 

the  persons  who  undoubtedly  were  there — and  that 
the  name  of  "  Sanzaver  "  in  Brompton's  List  is  not  a 
corruption  of  Saint-Sauveur,  but  of  Sanzavier  (Sans- 
avoir),  a  family  which  established  itself  in  England 
at  the  time  of  the  Conquest,  and  of  whom  some 
charters  are  to  be  found  in  Dugdale's  "  Monasticon." 

Surely  this  is  very  illogical.  Brompton's  inclusion 
of  the  name  of  Sanzavier  in  his  List,  which  is  as 
little  to  be  relied  upon  as  any  other,  does  not  dis- 
prove the  presence  of  Neel  de  Saint-Sauveur  in  the 
army  of  William,  any  more  than  the  silence  of  Guil- 
laume  de  Poitiers,  or  the  other  historians  of  the 
Conquest  who  merely  mention  a  few  of  the  principal 
leaders  and  contradict  each  other  about  them.  That 
Wace  is  in  error  requires  some  much  stronger  argu- 
ment, and  I  think  I  can  show  that  probabilities  are  at 
least  in  his  favour. 

He  speaks  of  the  Barons  of  the  Cotentin,  of  which 
province  Neel  was  the  Viscount,  that  he  was  at  the 
head  of  a  company — "  Jost  la  cumpaigne  Neel  " 
(1.  13,626),  and  that  he  exerted  himself  greatly  to 
gain  the  love  and  favour  of  his  feudal  lord,  vigorously 
assaulting  the  English,  overthrowing  many  by  the 
poitrail  of  his  horse,  and  speeding,  sword  in  hand,  to 
the  rescue  of  many  barons  (1.  13,489).  It  is  quite 
clear  that  Wace  knew  well  enough  whom  he  was 


142         THE  CONQUEROR  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

describing  :  and  now  let  us  see  what  evidence  we  can 
find  to  support  him. 

It  is  well  known  that  after  the  "  Noble  Chef  de 
Faucon,"  as  he  was  called,  unwillingly  retreated  from 
Val-es-Dunes,  he  was  banished  by  Duke  William,  and 
took  refuge  in  Brittany,  that  he  was  subsequently 
pardoned  and  restored  to  his  estates,  at  what  time  is 
not  exactly  ascertained,  but  most  likely  at  the  moment 
the  politic  Duke  felt  the  importance  of  such  assistance 
as  the  valorous  Viscount  could  afford  him  in  his  pro- 
jected expedition;  and,  consequently,  we  find  him  at 
the  head  of  a  company,  exerting  himself  to  deserve 
the  favour  of  the  suzerain  who  had  forgiven  him  his 
former  rebellion. 

That  he  is  not  mentioned  in  "  Domesday  "  is,  as  Mr. 
Taylor  admits,  to  be  accounted  for  by  the  supposition 
that  he  died  previously  to  its  compilation ;  and  that 
supposition  receives  support  from  the  fact  that  his  son 
and  successor,  the  last  Neel  de  Saint-Sauveur,  died  in 
1092,  seven  years  afterwards,  as  is  proved  by  the 
desire  of  his  relative,  Geoffrey,  Bishop  of  Coutances, 
to  attend  his  funeral  ("Mem.  Ant.  Norman."  i.  286, 
the  bishop  himself  dying  the  following  year. 

According  to  the  Welsh  Chronicles,  as  trans- 
mitted to  us  by  Humphrey  Lloyd  and  Dr.  Powell, 
Neel  the  Viscount  was  one  of  the  slain  in  the  battle 


NEEL  DE  SAINT-SAUVEUB,  U3 

of  Cardiff,  A.D.  1094  (p.  116).  Mons.  de  Gerville, 
following  the  French  account,  says  1074,  but  after- 
wards, as  I  have  already  mentioned,  corrects  as 
he  imagines  this  date,  substituting  that  of  1092  ; 
evidently  confounding  him  with  his  son  and  suc- 
cessor above  mentioned. 

The  more  critically  the  Welsh  account  of  the  battle 
of  Cardiff  is  examined,  the  more  does  the  general 
truth  of  the,  story  appear,  and  if  the  last  Neel  the 
Viscount  was  killed  in  Wales  in  1092,  in  company 
of  Koger,  Earl  of  Shrewsbury,  and  Arnold  de  Har- 
court,  there  is  every  probability  that  his  father  was 
a  companion  of  the  Conqueror  in  1066. 

But  Wace  names  also  a  "  Sire  de  Neahou " 
amongst  the  combatants  at  Senlac,  and  it  is  a  question 
whether  he  is  alluding  to  Neel  de  Saint-Sauveur  by 
another  title,  or  to  some  distinct  individual.  The 
fief  of  Nehou,  in  the  arrondissement  of  Valognes, 
received  its  name  from  Neel,  an  ancestor  of  the  Saint- 
Sauveur  family,  Nehou  signifying  Neel's  Hou  or  Holm, 
i.  e.  Nigelli  Humus.  On  the  banishment  of  Neel  the 
Viscount  in  1047,  Nehou  is  said  to  have  been  given  by 
Duke  William  to  Baldwin  de  Meules  ;  but  it  could  not 
have  been  at  that  period,  as  Baldwin  and  his  brother 
Eichard  were  then  refugees  in  Flanders,  and  not 
received  into  the  Duke's  favour  until  1053.  Was 


144         THE  UONQUEEOE  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

Nehou  excepted  when  William  restored  to  Neel  his 
estates  previous  to  the  Conquest,  or  did  it  pass  to  the 
Bivieres  (De  Redvers,  Kivers)  on  the  death  of  his  son, 
the  last  of  the  family,  in  1092  ?  I  shall  return  to 
this  subject  when  noticing  the  Vernons  (vide  p.  205), 
who  were  Sires  de  Nehou  from  the  end  of  the  eleventh 
to  the  end  of  the  thirteenth  century. 

WILLIAM  DE  EOUMAEE. 

This  is  supposed  to  be  another  inaccuracy  of  Master 
Wace's,  and  we  are  told  by  M.  le  Prevost  that  we 
should  read  Roger  instead  of  William,  the  Norman 
poat  having  substituted  the  name  of  the  son  for  that 
of  the  father.  That  William,  the  son  of  Roger  de 
Roumare,  was  not  at  Hastings  I  readily  admit,  but 
Wace  does  not  say  he  was.  He  simply  mentions  a 
"  Dam  Willame  de  Romare,"  and  unless  we  could 
clearly  show  there  was  no  such  person  then  existing, 
it  is  hardly  fair  to  tax  an  almost  contemporaneous 
author  with  even  unintentional  misrepresentation. 
The  pedigree  of  the  family  of  Roumare  is  one  of  the 
most  puzzling  in  the  whole  catalogue  of  Norman 
nobility.  The  diligent  study  of  forty  years  has  not 
enabled  me  to  penetrate  its  mysteries.  Edward  of 
Salisbury,  one  of  its  most  important  members,  has  still 
to  be  satisfactorily  affiliated,  and  the  Roger  de 


WILLIAM  DE  ROUMARE.  14  > 

Koumare  suggested  to  be  substituted  for  the  William 
of  Wace  is  equally  difficult  to  identify. 

It  is  almost  impossible  to  move  a  step  in  these 
directions  without  acknowledging  our  obligations  to- 
the  late  Mr.  Stapleton,  who  has  done  so  much  to  eluci- 
date the  descent  of  our  Anglo-Norman  ancestors. 

To  him  we  are  indebted  for  the  information  that 
previous  to  the  Conquest  there  lived  a  certain  Gerald, 
who  had  two  wives,  Albreda  and  Emicia,  and  a  son 
probably  by  the  first,  who  is  presumed  to  be  the- 
Kobert  Fitz  Gerald  of  Domesday,  and  the  brother  of 
Roger  Fitz  Gerald,  father  of  William  de  Roumare, 
created  Earl  of  Lincoln  by  King  Stephen. 

In  my  paper  on  "  The  Family  and  Connections  of 
Robert  Fitz  Gerald,"  the  Domesday  holder  of  Corfe,  in 
the  county  of  Dorset  (Congress  of  the  British  Archaeo- 
logical Association,  at  Weymouth,  1872),  I  exposed  the- 
absurd  story,  stereotyped  in  English  History,  of  the 
three  husbands  of  Lucia,  Countess  of  Chester,  which  had 
been  first  doubted  by  the  Rev.  Mr.  Bowles  in  his 
"  History  of  Laycock  Abbey  ;  "  but  with  the  particular 
object  of  that  Paper  I  have  at  present  nothing  to  do. 

All  that  we  know  of  Roger  Fitz  Gerald,  also  called 
De  Roumare,  or  De  Romara,  is  that  he  was  the  father 
of  the  William  de  Roumare,  first  of  that  name,  Earl  of 
Lincoln,  by  a  lady  named  Lucia,  who,  through  the 


VOL.  II. 


146         THE  CONQUEROK  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

neglect  of  verifying  dates,  has  been  confounded  pro- 
bably with  her  mother,  married  to  her  father  before 
she  was  born,  set  down  as  the  sister-in-law  of  her  own 
son,  and  thus  innocently  made  the  cause  of  consider- 
able trouble  to  the  learned  and  curious  in  history  and 
genealogy.  The  first  fact  we  are  in  possession  of 
respecting  Eoger  Fitz  Gerald  is  his  appearance  as  Lord 
of  Spalding  in  the  county  of  Lincoln,  before  the  death  of 
Rufus  in  1100.  The  date  of  his  marriage  is  unknown, 
but  his  son  William  must  have  been  of  full  age  in 
1122,  as  in  that  year  he  claimed  of  King  Hemy  I. 
certain  lands  which  his  step-father,  Ranulf  de 
Briquessart,  had  surrendered  to  the  King  for  the 
earldom  of  Chester.  It  is  clear,  therefore,  that  Roger 
was  dead  and  William  twenty-one  and  upwards  in 
1122,  so  that  the  latter  could  not  possibly  have  fought 
at  Senlac,  seeing  that  he  was  not  born  till  at  least 
thirty  }7ears  after  it. 

It  is  a  question,  indeed,  whether  his  father  Roger 
de  Roumare  was  present  at  Hastings,  as  we  find  him 
Lord  of  Spalding  thirty-four  years  afterwards,  and  are 
informed  that  he  was  a  young  man  newly  married  at 
that  period,  and  I  am  not  aware  of  any  reliable  evi- 
dence to  the  contrary. 

But,  as  I  have  already  observed,  there  is  nothing  in 
what  we  do  know  to  disprove  the  statement  of  Wace, 


WILLIAM  DE  ROUMARE.  147 

that  there  was  a  William  de  Roumare  in  the  ranks  of 
the  Norman  army  of  invasion.  Without  relying  on 
the  statement  of  Peter  de  Blois,  that  Roger  Fitz 
Gerald  had  an  elder  brother  named  William,  by  whom 
Lucia  was  honourably  received  on  her  marriage,  and 
whom  the  writer  inaccurately  styles  Earl  of  Lincoln, 
there  is  every  probability  that  such  was  the  fact. 

Gerold  de  Roumare,  the  presumed  father  of  Roger, 
had  two  wives — Albreda  and  Emicia ;  but  we  have 
no  information  whatever  that  can  be  relied  on  re- 
specting the  number  of  his  offspring,  or,  with  the 
exception  of  Robert,  of  which  of  his  wives  they  were 
the  issue. 

The  above  little  but  important  fact  is  derived  from 
a  charter  printed  in  Pommeraye's  "  Histoire  de  I'Ab- 
baye  de  St.  Amand  de  Rouen,"  fol.  1662,  in  which  a 
knight  named  Gerold  gives  to  the  Abbey  of  St.  Amand 
the  Church  of  Roumare  for  the  sake  of  his  own  soul 
and  that  of  his  wife  Albreda,  with  the  assent  of  his 
son  and  heir  Robert,  and  the  attestation  of  Ralph, 
brother  of  Gerold. 

The  son  Robert  is  supposed  to  be  the  Robert  Fitz 
Gerald  of  "Domesday,"  and  the  brother  Ralph  the 
Chamberlain  of  Tankerville,  of  whom  I  shall  have  to 
speak  presently.  Roger  is  not  mentioned,  nor  any 
William ;  but  if  there  was  a  William  de  Roumare,  an 

I.  2 


148         THE  CONQUEROE  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

elder  brother,  he  would  at  the  time  of  the  Conquest 
be  "  Dom  (Dominus)  William  de  Romare,"  and  dying 
unmarried  before  the  compilation  of  "  Domesday,"  no 
traces  might  have  been  left  of  him.  At  all  events  I  have 
found  nothing  to  justify  the  rejection  of  Wace's  state- 
ment, and  therefore  leave  the  name  of  William  at  the 
head  of  this  chapter  as  a  companion  of  the  Conqueror, 
convinced  that  there  might  be  a  Eobert,  but  certainly 
not  a  Roger,  Fitz  Gerald  in  the  host  at  Hastings. 

THE  CHAMBEELAIN  OF  TANKERYILLE. 

No  identification  of  this  noble  Norman  has  yet  been 
made  by  any  of  the  commentators  on  the  "  Roman  de 
Rou,"  in  which  alone  we  find  such  a  personage  in- 
cluded in  the  list  of  the  followers  of  the  Duke  of 
Normandy.  Mr.  Taylor  says,  "  M.  le  PreVost  rather 
inconclusively  observes  that  Ralph,  William's  guardian, 
was  too  old  and  his  children  too  young  to  be  engaged;" 
and  adds,  "  Ralph's  age  is  hardly  itself  a  competent 
contradiction  to  Wace's  statement ;  /or  his  charter 
giving  the  Church  of  Mireville  to  Jumieges  shows 
that  he  was  living  in  1079.  William,  his  son  and 
successor  as  Chamberlain,  so  appears  in  1082." 

I  certainly  do  not  share  the  opinion  of  Le  Prevost, 
and  am  at  a  loss  to  know  where  he  found  that  Ralph, 
the  Chamberlain  of  Tankerville,  was  guardian  to 


THE  CHAMBERLAIN  OF  TANKERVILLE.  149 

Duke  William.  I  have  just  mentioned  this  Ralph  as 
the  supposed  brother  of  Gerold  de  Roumare  and  uncle 
of  the  William  de  Roumare  I  believe  to  have  been 
at  Hastings.  Ralph  was  hereditary  chamberlain  of 
Normandy ;  but  which  of  his  family  had  first  exer- 
cised that  office  is  at  present  unknown. 

The  small  Church  of  St.  George,  in  the  vill  of  that 
name  in  the  forest  of  Roumare,  first  endowed  by  Duke 
William,  was  subsequently  rebuilt  by  Ralph,  who  is 
styled  by  the  Duke  in  his  charter  of  confirmation, 
"  Meus  magister  Aulaque  et  Camera  mea  princeps." 
"  My  major-domo  or  master  of  the  household  and  first 
chamberlain/'  Ralph  also  had  the  church  re-deco- 
rated, and  confirmed  the  grant  which  his  father,  Ge- 
raldus,  and  his  brothers  had  given  to  St.  George.  A 
brother  of  Ralph,  named  Giraldus,  was  also  an  officer 
of  William's  household  ;  and  it  was  "  Coram  Giraldo 
Dapifer  meo"  that  William,  while  yet  Duke  of  the 
Normans,  ratified  a  convention  between  Hugh  de 
Pavilly  and  the  Canons  of  St.  George,  the  witnesses 
being  the  same  Giraldus  and  Robert  his  son. 

Now  we  have  here  two  Gerolds,  one  who  simply 
styles  himself  "  a  soldier  of  Christ,"  and  the  other 
the  Dapifer  (steward  or  seneschal)  of  William,  King  of 
the  English.  We  also  find  one  of  these  Gerolds  re- 
joicing in  two  wives,  named  Albreda  and  Emicia,  and 


150         THE  CONQTTEBOB  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

who  has  a  son,  Robert,  by  the  first ;  while  the  other 
Gerold  had  a  wife  named  Helisendis.  Whether  they 
were  both  Gerolds  of  Eoumare,  how  they  were  con- 
nected, which  was  the  father  of  Roger  de  Roumare, 
and  which  of  Ralph  the  Chamberlain,  has  yet  to  be 
distinctly  proved.  The  names  of  Gerald,  Robert, 
Ralph,  and  William  were  much  too  common  at  that 
period  to  be  of  themselves  sufficient  identification  ; 
but  that  the  chamberlain  of  Tankerville  mentioned  by 
Wace  was  Ralph,  the  son  of  Gerold  and  father  of 
William  the  Chamberlain,  I  think  cannot  reasonably 
be  doubted.  A  little  more  light  on  the  family  of  the 
Chamberlain  has  been  thrown  by  the  authors  of 
"  Recherches  sur  le  Domesday,"  in  their  notice  of  a 
personage  better  known  to  the  readers  of  English 
history,  namely 

• 

UESO  D'ABETOT. 

The  name  of  "Dabitott"  appears  in  the  Roll  of 
Battle  Abbey,  and  although  not  mentioned  by  Wace 
and  the  other  chroniclers  of  the  eleventh  and  twelfth 
centuries,  may  fairly  be  admitted  as  belonging  to  one 
of  the  companions  of  the  Conqueror,  the  absence  of  his 
baptismal  name,  however,  preventing  us  from  appro- 
priating it  to  Urso  or  to  his  father,  Aumary  d'Abetot, 
an  appellation  derived  from  the  lands  of  St.  Jean 


UESO  D'ABETOT.  151 


d'Abetot,  canton  of  Calbose,  arrondissement  of  Havre, 
the  lordship  of  which  belonged  to  the  family  of 
Tankerville,  as  appears  from  the  charter  of  formation 
of  the  college  of  St.  George  de  Bosherville,  to  which 
Ralph  Fitz  Gerald,  in  1050,  gave  the  church  and 
tithes  of  Abetot  for  the  support  of  the  monks  of  that 
college,  which  was  made  an  abbey  in  1124. 

This  Ralph  Fitz  Gerald,  who  is  the  Chamberlain  of 
Tankerville  of  the  last  memoir,  was  the  elder  brother 
of  Aumary  d'Abetot,  above  mentioned.  Their  father 
being  the  Gerold  who  was  the  husband  of  Helisendis 
(not  Gerold  of  Roumare,  husband  of  Albreda),  and 
who  probably,  as  Sire  de  Tankerville,  held  the  hereditary 
office  of  chamberlain  to  the  Dukes  of  Normandy,  which 
we  find  his  son  Ralph  and  his  grandson  William 
enjoying  in  succession. 

Aumary,  his  younger  son,  inherited  the  fiefs  of 
Abetot,  and  was  the  father  of  two  sons,  Urso  and 
Robert,  the  latter  distinguished  as  "Despencer,"  an 
office  which  gave  a  name  to  the  noble  families  of  Le 
Despencer  and  Spenser,  who  trace  their  descent  from 
the  niece  of  this  Robert  d'Abetot.  Whether  Urso 
was  or  was  not  in  the  army  at  Hastings  there  is  at 
present  no  decisive  evidence;  but  that  he  was  in 
England  shortly  afterwards,  and  made  sheriff  of  the 
counties  of  Gloucester  and  Worcester,  there  is  proof 


152         THE  CONQUEEOE  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

enough.  In  1073  he  was  one  of  the  King's  council, 
and  rendered  great  service  in  the  suppression  of  the 
rebellion  of  the  Earls  of  Hereford  and  Norfolk.  His 
character,  however,  as  a  spoiler  and  devastator  is, 
amongst  the  worst  recorded  of  the  Norman  settlers  in 
England,  and  he  appears  to  have  especially  oppressed 
the  Church  of  Worcester,  building  so  close  to  it  that 
the  mole  of  the  castle  encroached  on  the  cemetery 
of  the  monks.* 

A  complaint  being  made  to  Archbishop  Ealdred, 
Archbishop  of  York,  he  came  to  Worcester  and  in- 
spected the  work,  and  sternly  reproved  Urso,  to  whom 
he  is  reported  to  have  said  : — 

"  Hightest  thou,  Urse? 
Have  thou  God's  curse  !" 

adding,  "  and  mine  and  that  of  all  holy  men  unless 
thou  removest  thy  castle  from  hence,  and  know  of  a 
truth  that  thine  offspring  shall  not  long  hold  the  land 
of  St.  Mary  to  their  heritage. " 

The  prophecy,  if  not  a  subsequent  invention,  was 
soon  fulfilled,  for  his  son  Eoger  d'Abetot,  having 
killed  a  servant  of  Henry  I.,  was  banished  and  his 
confiscated  estates  given  by  the  King,  with  the  hand 
of  his  sister  Emmeline  dAbetot,  to  Walter  de  Beau- 
champ  of  Bedford. 

*  William  of  Malmesbury  :  De  Gestis  Pontificum. 


WALTER  AND  ILBERT  DE  LACY.  153 

Urso  was  living  as  late  as  the  reign  of  Henry  L, 
but  the  date  of  his  death  is  not  recorded.  The 
authors  of  "  Eecherches  "  were  mistaken  in  saying  that 
his  wife's  name  was  unknown.  She  witnessed  her 
husband's  charter  to  Great  Malvern  as  "Atheliza, 
Vicecomitissi."  Of  her  parentage  however,  we  are 
ignorant. 

The  ungallant  conduct  of  the  early  genealogists 
toward  the  female  members  of  our  noble  Norman 
families,  deprives  history  of  much  of  its  interest  and 
is  the  cause  of  endless  confusion  and  perplexity. 

WALTER  AND  ILBERT  DE  LACY. 

Lacie,  now  called  Lassy,  the  place  from  which  this 
great  Norman  family  derived  its  name,  is  on  the  road 
from  Vere  to  Auvray.  Of  its  earlier  lords  we  know 
nothing,  and  Waco's  "  Cil  de  Lacie "  and  "  Le 
Chevalier  de  Lacie/'  do  not  enlighten  us.  Neither  do 
we  receive  much  assistance  from  his  French  or  English 
annotators,  who  refer  us  to  Dugdale  and  the  English 
genealogists. 

From  them  we  learn  that  a  Walter  and  an  Ilbert  dc 
Lacy  were  certainly  present  at  Senlac,  though  how 
related  to  each  other  they  have  no  evidence,  nor  can 
we  venture  to  suggest  which  was  the  "  Sire  de  Lacie  " 
of  the  poet,  and  which  "  the  Chevalier/'  if  we  are  to 


154         THE  CONQUEROR  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

consider  them  two  distinct  personages.  That  they 
were  brothers,  however,  is  fairly  presumable,  from  the 
fact  that  the  mother  of  Ilbert  de  Lacy,  Emma,  is 
named  in  a  charter,  and  Walter  had  a  daughter  Emma, 
named  according  to  custom  after  her  grandmother. 
No  particular  deed  of  arms  is  attributed  to  either  ;  but 
the  Sire  de  Lacie  is  named  as  one  of  a  party  of  seven 
or  eight  knights  who  charged  the  J^nglish  in  company, 
"  fearing  neither  prince  nor  pope.  Many  a  man  did 
they  overthrow,  many  did  they  wound,  and  many  a 
good  horse  did  they  kill."  As  early  as  the  third  year 
of  William's  reign,  1069,  Walter  de  Lacy  was  sent  into 
Wales  with  William  Fitz  Osbern  and  other  tried 
soldiers,  against  the  people  of  Brecknock,  led  by  their 
Prince  of  Wales,  Rhys  ap  Owen,  Cadogan  ap  Blethyn, 
and  Meredith  ap  Owen,  whom  they  attacked  and  de- 
feated with  great  slaughter. 

Subsequently  he  assisted  Wulstan,  Bishop  of 
Worcester,  and  Urso  d'Abitot,  then  sheriff  of  that 
county,  in  preventing  the  passing  of  the  Severn  by 
the  Earls  of  Hereford  and  Norfolk,  with  the  object  of 
effecting  a  junction  of  their  forces. 

His  death,  however,  was  not  on  the  field  of  battle, 
nor  was  he  shorn  a  monk  in  some  abbey  according  to 
a  prevalent  custom  of  the  period. 

Having  founded  the  Church  of  St.  Peter  at  Hereford, 


WALTER  AND  ILBERT  DE  LACY.  155 

and  taking  much  interest  in  the  building,  when  the 
work  was  nearly  finished,  he  mounted  a  ladder  to 
inspect  some  portion  of  it,  when  his  foot  slipping,  he  fell 
and  was  killed  on  the  spot  (6  kalends  of  April,  1084). 

He  was  buried  in  the  chapter-house  of  the  Cathedral 
at  Gloucester,  to  which  Emmeline,  his  wife,  for  the 
health  of  his  soul,  gave  five  hides  of  land  at 
Duntesborne. 

By  this  lady,  whoever  she  was,  he  left  three  sons, 
Roger,  Hugh,  and  "Walter,  the  last  a  monk  in  the 
Abbey  of  St.  Peter  at  Gloucester ;  and  two  daughters, 
Ermeline  and  Emma. 

Dying  before  the  compilation  of  Domesday,  we  can- 
not be  certain  what  was  his  reward  in  lands  and 
honours  for  the  sendees  he  had  rendered  his 
sovereign ;  but  in  that  precious  record  we  find  his 
son  and  successor,  Roger,  in  possession  of  ninety-six 
lordships,  sixty-five  of  which  were  in  Gloucestershire, 
besides  four  carucates  of  land  lying  within  the  limits 
of  the  Castle  of  Civia,  which  King  William  had 
bestowed  on  his  father.  Conspiring,  however,  against 
William  Rufus,  first  with  Odo,  Bishop  of  Bayeux, 
and  afterwards  with  Robert  de  Mowbray,  Earl  of 
Northumberland,  he  was  banished  the  realm  and  all 
his  lands  given  to  his  brother  Hugh,  the  founder  of 
Llanthony  Priory,  who,  dying  without  issue,  left  his 


156         THE  CONQUEKOK  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

great  inheritance  between  his  two  sisters  above 
named.  Ermeline  had  no  children  ;  but  Emma,*  by  a 
husband  unnamed,  had  issue,  a  son,  Gilbert,  who 
assumed  the  name  of  Lacy  and  became  the  ancestor  of 
the  great  lord  of  Ulster  and  conqueror  of  the  largest 
part  of  Ireland. 

ILBEET  DE  LACY. 

The  other  companion  of  the  Conqueror  received  for 
his  services  at  Senlac,  the  castle  and  town  of  Ponte- 
fract  and  all  that  part  of  the  county  of  Lancaster  then 
as  now  called  Blackburnshire,  with  other  lands  of  vast 
extent,  so  that  at  the  time  of  the  general  survey  he 
possessed  one  hundred  and  seventy  lordships,  the 
greater  portion  of  them  in  Yorkshire,  Nottinghamshire, 
and  Lincolnshire,  and  obtained  from  King  William 
Eufus  a  confirmation  of  all  those  customs  belonging  to 
his  Castle  at  Pontefract,  which  he  had  enjoyed  in  the 
time  of  King  William  his  father. 

By  his  wife,  a  lady  named  Hawise,  he  left  two  sons, 
Eobert  and  Hugh,  the  former  of  Avhom  completed 
the  building  of  the  Abbey  of  St.  Oswald  at  Nostcll,  the 
foundation  of  which  was  commenced  by  his  father,  and 
amply  endowed  it. 

*  An  Emma  de  Lacie,  probably  the  aunt  of  this  Emma,  took  the 
veil  in  the  Convent  of  St.  Amand  de  Eouen  before  1069. 


EGBERT  AND  IVO  DE  VESCI.  157 

This  true  line  of  Lacy  terminated  with  the  grandson 
of  the  above  Kobert,  and  the  Constables  of  Chester  and 
the  Earls  of  Lincoln,  who  assumed  the  name,  inherited 
the  lands  and  honours,  but  not  a  drop  of  the  Lacy 
blood,  as  it  would  be  inferred  from  the  polite  peer- 
ages in  which  the  reader  would  naturally  look  for 
information.  As  frequently  we  find  it  to  be  the  case, 
they  need  not  the  flattering  unction  applied  to  them, 
being  descended  from  equally  ancient  and  valiant 
progenitors,  the  families  of  the  De  Lizures  and  the  Fitz 
Nigels,  barons  of  Halton,  united  in  the  persons  of 
Kichard  Fitz  Eustace,  Constable  of  Chester,  in  right  of 
his  mother  Agnes,  the  first  wife  of  Henry  de  Lacy,  by 
her  former  husband,  Eustace  Fitz  John,  and  of 
Albreda,  daughter  of  Robert  de  Lizures,  by  the  second 
wife  and  widow  of  the  said  Henry. 

EGBERT  AND  IVO  DE  VESCI. 

Robert  and  Ivo  de  Vassy,  in  the  arrondissement  of 
Vere,  and  anglicised  Vesci,  are  admitted  to  have  been 

'  O  * 

in  William's  expedition,  and  to  have  settled  in  England. 
Their  family  connection  with  the  later  Lacies,  Earls  of 
Lincoln,  induces  me  to  select  them  for  the  notice 
immediately  following. 

The  relations  of  these  two  valiant  Normans  is  as 
uncertain  as  that  of  Walter  and  Ilbert  de  Lacy,  and 


158         THE  CONQUEROE  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

the  same  difficulty  exists  of  identifying  the  "  Sires  de 
Vaccie,"  mentioned  by  Wace  with  the  Eobert  and  Ivo 
aforesaid. 

The  former  we  find  in  Domesday  the  possessor  of 
nineteen  lordships   in  the  counties  of  Northampton, 
Warwick,  Lincoln,  and  Leicester,  and  Ivo  equally  well 
provided    for,    the  Conqueror  having  presented  him 
with  the  hand  of  Alda,  the  granddaughter  of  Gilbert 
Tyson,  Lord  of  Alnwick,  in  the  county  of  Northum- 
berland, who  had  fallen  on  the  side  of  Harold  at  Senlac, 
and  only  daughter  and  heir  of  his  son  William,  Lord 
of  Alnwick   and  Malton,  to  whom  she  bore  an  only 
daughter  and  heir,  Beatrice,  the  first  wife  of  Eustace 
Fitz  John,  whose  son,  by  her  named  William,  assumed 
the  name  of  De  Vesci  and  bequeathed  it  to  his  heirs. 
His  grandson  John  was  the  first  Baron  de  Vesci  sum- 
moned to  Parliament  by  writ,  24th  December,  1264 ; 
and  with  William,  the  illegitimate  son  of  his  brother 
William,    summoned   by  writ   as    third    Baron,    8th 
January,  1313,  and  killed  at  the  battle  of  Sterling 
in  1315,  the   title    became  extinct,  and  the  estates 
were  carried  by  the  heiress  of  a  collateral  branch  into 
the  family  of  the  Cliffords,  Earls  of  Cumberland,  with 
the  exception  of  Alnwick,  which  was  sold  in  1309  to 
Henry  de  Percy,  and  thus  became  one  of  the  noblest 
possessions  of  the  Earls  of  Northumberland. 


EUGUENULF  DE  L'AIGLE.  .,          159 

The  present  Viscount  de  Vesci  and  Lords  Fitz 
Gerald  and  Vesci  claim  to  be  descended  from  a 
collateral  branch  of  this  family  which  settled  in 
Scotland. 

M.  le  Prevost,  in  the  supplement  to  his  Notes  on 
the  "  Eoman  de  Rou,"  tells  us  that  according  to  the 
information  furnished  to  M.  Lachesnaye  des  Bois,  the 
family  of  Vassy  descended  from  Richard,  nephew  of 
Raoul  Tete-d'Ane  (Raoul  de  Grace'  so  called)  by  his 
grandson  Auvray,  who  inherited  the  lands  of  Vassy, 
and  gave  his  name  to  the  forest  of  Auvray ;  but  that 
unfortunately  such  persons  are  only  known  to  us  from 
the  traditions  of  the  family  at  present  bearing  the 
name. 

M.  de  G-erville  remarks  that  there  is  a  Vesey  near 
Pontorson,  but  does  not  consider  that  it  is  in  any  way 
connected  with  the  Vassys  of  Normandy,  or  the  Vescis 
of  England ;  the  latter  of  whom,  wherever  they  hail 
from,  are  undoubtedly  descendants  of  the  companions 
of  the  Conqueror. 

EUGUENULF  DE  L'AIGLE. 

This  gallant  Norman,  called  Enguerrand  by  Wace, 
was  the  son  of  Fulbert  de  Beine,  founder  of  the  Castle 
of  1'Aigle,  on  the  river  Risle,  arrondissement  of  Mortain, 


160         THE  CONQUEKOR  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

and  therefore  probably  one  of  the  knights  in  the 
service  of  Robert,  Comte  de  Mortain. 

Wace  tells  us  "he  came  with  shield  slung  at  his 
neck,  and  with  his  lance  fiercely  charged  the  English. 
He  strove  hard  to  serve  the  Duke  well  for  the  sake  of 
the  lands  he  had  promised  him "  (Roman  de  Rou, 
1.  13,592). 

Alas !  he  was  not  allowed  to  enjoy  what  he  had 
so  bravely  striven  to  obtain.  He  is  one  of  the  very 
few  whose  names  have  descended  to  us  as  having 
undoubtedly  fallen  in  that  memorable  battle.  "Wace, 
strangely  enough,  says  nothing  of  his  death,  which  is 
thus  recorded  by  Orderic :  "  The  Normans,  finding  the 
English  completely  routed,  pursued  them  vigorously 
all  Sunday  night,  but  not  without  suffering  a  great 
loss,  for  galloping  onward  in  hot  pursuit  they  fell  un- 
awares, horses  and  armour,  into  an  ancient  trench, 
overgrown  and  concealed  by  rank  grass,  and  rolling 
over  each  other  were  crushed  and  smothered.  This 
accident  restored  confidence  to  the  routed  English, 
for,  perceiving  the  advantage  given  them  by  the 
mouldering  rampart  and  a  succession  of  ditches, 
they  rallied  in  a  body,  and,  making  a  sudden 
stand,  caused  the  Normans  severe  loss.  At  this  place 
Enguerrand,  Lord  of  1'Aigle,  and  many  others  fell, 
the  number  of  the  Normans  who  perished  being, 


EUGUENULF  DE  L'AIGLE.  161 

as  reported  by  some  who  were  present,  nearly  fifteen 
thousand."  * 

Fifteen  thousand  !  Exactly  a  fourth  of  the  invad- 
ing army,  the  entire  force  of  which  is  calculated  at 
sixty  thousand  men.  Orderic  must  surely  mean  the 
loss  in  the  whole  action,  and  not  in  that  particular 
disaster  in  the  "  Malefosse,"  which  is  still  to  my 
mind  as  uncertain  both  as  regards  time  and  locality 
as  ever.  The  scene  of  this  celebrated  incident  has 
been  generally  considered  to  be  on  one  side  or  other  of 
the  hill  of  Senlac  itself ;  but  if  Orderic's  account  is  to 
be  credited,  and  the  Normans  were  hotly  pursuing  the 
fugitives  all  Sunday  night,  they  must  have  been  some 
miles  distant  from  the  field  of  battle  when  they 
floundered  into  this  fatal  ravine  or  morass  in  the  grey 
light  of  Monday  morning. 

The  death  of  Euguenulf  is  all  that  concerns  us  at 
the  present  moment,  and  whether  he  was  slain  in  the 
thick  of  the  fight  or  in  the  pursuit  may  never  be 
ascertained.  All  the  accounts  we  have  of  the  battle 
are  derived  from  hearsay  evidence  only,  and  are  as 
loose  and  contradictory  as  such  accounts  must  ever  be. 

To  return  to  Euguenulf  himself.  He  had  for  wife 
a  lady  named  Bicheveride,  by  whom  he  was  father  of 
three  sons,  Koger,  Richard,  and  Gilbert.  Roger,  the 

*  Lib.  iii.,  cap.  xii. 


162         THE  CONQUEROK  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

eldest,  was  slain  (how  is  not  recorded)  about  the  year 
1060,  and  Orderic  informs  us  that  Euguenulf  and  his- 
wife  Bicheveride  came  to  St.  Evroult  in  deep  grief, 
entreating  the  prayers  and  good  offices  of  the  monks 
for  the  salvation  of  their  souls  and  that  of  their  son 
Roger,  which  were  granted,  and  thereupon  Roger's- 
best  horse  was  offered  by  his  parents  to  God  and  the 
monks.  The  horse  being  very  valuable,  Arnould 
d'Eschafour  begged  to  have  it  in  exchange  for  the 
lands  and  services  of  Baldric  de  Bacquency,  whose 
fief  had  been  ceded  to  him  by  the  Abbey. 

We  find,  therefore,  that  six  years  before  the  inva- 
sion Euguenulf  was  married,  and  the  father  of  appa- 
rently grown-up  sons,  and  we  may  therefore  conclude- 
that  he  was  between  forty  and  fifty  in  1066,  when  he 
was  killed  at  Senlac. 

A  sad  fate  seemed  to  pursue  his  family.  On  the 
18th  November,  1085,  while  the  royal  army  under 
the  command  of  Alan  the  Red,  Earl  of  Richmond, 
was  marching  to  the  siege  of  the  Castle  of  St. 
Suzanne,  a  beardless  youth,  concealed  in  the  bushes  on 
the  roadside,  shot  an  arrow,  which  mortally  wounded 
Richer  de  TAigle,  the  eldest  surviving  son  of  Euguenulf, 
in  the  eye.  His  followers  rode  up,  burning  with  rage, 
and  seizing  the  youth,  would  have  put  him  to  death  on 
the  spot ;  but  the  dying  Baron,  with  a  violent  effort, 


EUGUENULF  DE  L'AIGLE.  163 


generously  exclaimed,  "Spare    him   for   the  love    of 
God !     It  is  for  my  sins  that  I  am  thus  called  to  die." 

The  assassin  being  allowed  to  go  free,  the  noble 
lord  confessed  himself  to  his  companions  in  arms, 
and  expired  before  they  could  convey  him  to  I/Aigle. 
His  body  was  borne  to  the  convent  of  St.  Sulpice- 
sur-Risle,  which  his  father  had  founded  near  L'Aigle, 
where  he  was  buried,  with  great  lamentations  of 
his  kinsfolk  and  connections,  by  Gilbert  Bishop  of 
Evreux. 

In  the  month  of  January  following,  Gilbert  de 
1'Aigle,  eager  to  avenge  his  brother,  made,  in  con- 
junction with  William  de  Warren  and  William  Comte 
d'Evreux,  a  desperate  assault  on  the  Castle  of  St. 
Suzanne  ;  but  they  were  vigorously  repulsed  by  the 
garrison.  William  Comte  d'Evreux  being  taken  prisoner. 
In  1091  we  find  Gilbert  in  high  favour  with  Robert 
Court-heuse,  who  made  him  Viscount  of  the  Hiemois, 
and  gave  him  the  castle  for  his  residence. 

This  deeply  offended  the  violent  and  detestable 
Robert  de  Belesme,  of  whose  turbulence  and  wicked- 
ness you  have  heard  so  much  already,  who  assembled 
his  troops,  and  in  the  first  week  of  January,  1091, 
besieged  the  castle  for  four  days,  assaulting  it  with 
great  fury  and  persistence,  notwithstanding  a  severe 
frost  and  heavy  fall  of  snow.  Gilbert  had  but  a  small 

M  2 


1G4         THE  CONQUEROR  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

number  of  retainers  in  the  castle,  but  they  were  brave 
and  loyal,  and  made  a  stout  resistance,  hurling  spears 
and  stones  on  the  assailants,  and  precipitating  into 
the  ditch  those  who  attempted  to  scale  the  walls. 
Meanwhile  his  nephew,  Gilbert,  the  young  lord  of 
L'Aigle,  son  of  Eicher  slain  on  the  march  to  St.  Suzanne, 
hearing  of  his  uncle's  position,  came  to  his  assistance 
with  eighty  men,  and  getting  into  the  castle  by  night, 
supplied  the  garrison  with  fresh  provisions  and  arms, 
and  enabled  them  to  continue  the  defence.  Upon 
this,  Eobert  de  Belesme,  finding  the  place  too  strong 
for  him,  in  great  rage  and  mortification  drew  off  his 
troops,  and  retreated  ingloriously  to  his  own  territory. 
The  following  year,  as  the  elder  Gilbert,  brother  of 
Eicher,  was  returning  home  from  a  visit  to  Sainte 
Scholasse,  he  halted  at  Moulins  to  pay  his  respects  to 
Duda,  daughter  of  Waleran,  Earl  of  Meulent,  and 
second  wife  of  William  de  Moulins,  lord  of  that  castle, 
and  leaving  towards  evening  unarmed  and  attended 
only  by  his  esquires,  was  seen  and  pursued  by  Gerrard 
Chevreuil  and  Eobert  de  Ferrers,  with  some  thirteen 
men-at-arms  of  the  Corbonnais,  who  endeavoured  to 
take  him  alive.  He  spurred  his  horse  to  a  gallop,  but 
was  overtaken  and  wounded  in  the  side  by  one  of  their 
spears  so  badly  that  he  died  the  same  day,  and  on  the 
morrow,  which  was  bissextile- day  (29th  of  February, 


EUGUENULF  DE  L'AIGLE.  165 

1092),  he  was  buried  at  St.  Sulpice,  by  the  side  of  his 
parents,  amid  universal  sorrow,  Gilbert,  Bishop  of 
Evreux,  and  Serlo,  Abbot  of  St.  Evroult,  officiating. 

Thus  we  see  the  three  sons  of  Euguenulf,  who  him- 
self fell  in  battle,  meet  one  after  the  other  Avith  a 
violent  death.  Roger  slain  in  his  youth,  Eicher  in 
the  pride  of  manhood,  and  Gilbert  while  still  in  the 
prime  of  life. 

The  latter  was  unmarried,  but  Richer  was  the 
husband  of  Judith,  daughter  of  Richard,  surnamed 
Goz,  Viscount  of  the  Avranchin,  and  Emma  de  Conte- 
ville,  half-sister  of  the  Conqueror,  to  whom  he  conse- 
quently stood  in  the  position  of  a  nephew. 

This  lord,  says  Orderic,  "  was  deservedly  regretted 
by  his  acquaintance  for  the  many  virtues  with  which 
he  was  endowed.  In  person  he  was  strong,  handsome, 
and  active;  a  faithful  observer  of  the  divine  laws, 
courteous  and  humble  with  men  of  religion,  prudent 
and  eloquent  in  worldly  affairs,  and  gentle  and  liberal 
in  all  his  conduct." 

The  issue  of  Richer  and  Judith  were  Gilbert,  Eugue- 
nulf, Matilda,  and,  according  to  Orderic,  "several 
other  sons  and  daughters  • "  but  I  have  not  found 

O  * 

traces  of  them.  "They  all,"  he  adds,  "died"  (early, 
I  presume  he  means)  with  the  exception  of  Gilbert, 
"  who  became  the  heir  to  his  father's  virtues,  estates, 


166         THE  CONQUEKOR  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

and  honours."  He  should  have  also  excepted  Matilda, 
wife  of  Kobert  de  Mowbray,  and  who  by  dispensation  of 
the  Pope  married,  during  her  husband's  incarceration, 
Nigel  de  Albini  (vide  p.  30,  ante),  but  who  cer- 
tainly was  not  an  exception  to  the  unfortunate  destiny 
attending  the  majority  of  her  family. 

Gilbert,  the  second  of  that  name,  Lord  of  L'Aigle, 
the  young  warrior  who  so  opportunely  came  to  the 
rescue  of  his  uncle  when  besieged  by  Kobert  de 
Belesme,  married  Juliana,  daughter  of  Geoffrey,  Count 
of  Mortagne,  who,  reflecting  that  the  slaying  of  Gilbert 
Viscount  of  the  Hiemois,  by  men  who  were  his  vassals, 
had  sown  the  seeds  of  infinite  mischief  to  his  own 
territories,  endeavoured  to  accommodate  matters  with 
the  nephew,  and  prove  that  he  had  no  participation  in 
the  act,  by  the  offer  to  him  of  his  daughter's  hand, 
which  was  accepted,  and  secured  peace  between  the 
two  families  for  a  period  of  forty  years,  an  unprece- 
dented circumstance  in  the  early  history  of  Normandy, 
the  barons  whereof  were  in  constant  hostility  one  with 
another. 

But  even  peace  could  not  preserve  the  line  of 
L'Aigle  from  calamity.  Of  the  four  sons  born  to 
Gilbert  and  Juliana,  two  were  drowned  together  in 
the  wreck  of  the  "  White  Ship,"  25th  November, 
1120. 


CHAPTER  VII. 


SROBEKT   MARM10N. 


HUGH   DE    BEAUCHAMP. 
WILLIAM   DE    PERCY. 


ROBERT   FITZ    ERNEIS. 
WILLIAM     PATRY      DE      LA 
LANDE. 


EGBERT  MAEMION. 

THIS  name,  familiarised  to  the  reader's  ears  by  the 
noble  poem  of  Walter  Scott,  will  conjure  up  visions  of 
"  Norham's  castled  steep/'  and  the  welcome  that 
awaited  there  the — 

' '  — Lord  of  Fontenraye, 
Of  Lutterward  and  Scrivelbaye, 
Of  Tamworth.  Tower  and  Town ;  " 

a  fictitious  personage,  as  "  the  Wizard  of  the  North  " 
admits,  but  invested  by  his  genius  with  such  •  a  sem- 
blance of  truth,  that  it  is  difficult  not  to  believe  in  his 
existence. 

Wace  speaks  of  the  companion  of  the  Conqueror 
-as  "  old  Roger  Marmion ; "  but  no  Roger  appears 
in  the  pedigree  before  the  times  of  Richard  I.  It  is 
generally  conceived  that  Roger  is  either  a  clerical  or 


168         THE  CONQTJEBOB  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

typographical  error,  and  that  Kobert,  to  whom  Wil- 
liam the  Conqueror  gave  "Tamworth  Tower  and 
Town "  shortly  after  the  Conquest,  must  be  the 
Marmion  who  had  assisted  him  in  the  achievement. 

Of  that  Kobert  the  following  story  is  told  by  Dug- 
dale,  on  the  faith  of  an  ancient  MS.  in  his  day  in 
the  possession  of  John  Ferrers,  Esq.,  of  Tamworth 
Castle. 

"  In  the  time  of  the  Norman  Conqueror,  Eobert 
Marmion  having,  by  the  gift  of  that  king,  the  Castle  of 
Tamworth,  in  the  county  of  Warwick,  with  the  territory 
adjacent,  thence  expelled  those  nuns  he  found  there 
unto  a  place  called  Oldbury,  about  four  miles  distant, 
after  which,  within  the  compass  of  a  twelvemonth  it 
is  said,  making  a  costly  entertainment  at  Tamworth 
Castle  for  some  of  his  friends,  amongst  which  was  Sir 
Walter  de  Somerville,  Lord  of  Whichever,  in  the  county 
of  Stafford,  his  sworn  brother,  it  so  happened  that  as  he 
lay  in  his  bed,  St.  Edith  appeared  to  him  as  a  veiled 
nun,  with  a  crozier  in  her  hand,  and  advertized  him, 
that  if  he  did  not  restore  the  Abbey  of  Poles  worth, 
(which  lay  within  the  territories  of  the  Castle  of 
Tamworth,)  he  should  have  an  evil  death,  and  go  to 

."  Well,  it  appears  St.  Edith  did  not  mince  her 

words,  but  spoke  pure  Anglo-Saxon,  "  and  that  he 
might  be  the  more  sensible  of  this  her  admonition," 


EGBERT  MABMION.  1GJ> 

continues  the  narrator,  "  she  smote  him  on  the  side 
with  the  point  of  her  crozier,  and  so  vanished  away  ! 
Moreover,  that  by  this  stroke  being  much  wounded, 
he  cried  out  so  loud  that  his  friends  in  the  house 
arose,  and  rinding  him  extremely  tormented  with  the 
pain  of  his  wound,  advised  him  to  confess  himself  to 
a  priest,  and  vow  to  restore  them  (the  nuns)  to  their 
former  possession.  Furthermore,  that  having  so  done, 
his  pain  eased,  and  that  in  accomplishment  of  his 
vow,  accompanied  by  Sir  Walter  de  Somerville  and 
the  rest,  he  forthwith  rode  to  Oldbury,  and  craving 
pardon  of  the  nuns  for  the  injury  done,  brought  them 
back  to  Polesworth,  desiring  that  himself  and  his 
friend  Sir  Walter  de  Somerville  might  be  reputed 
their  patrons,  and  have  burial  for  themselves  and  their 
heirs  in  the  Abbey,  viz.,  the  Marmions  in  the  chapter- 
house, and  the  Somervilles  in  the  cloister."  "How- 
ever," adds  worthy  Norroy,  "  some  circumstances 
in  this  story  may  seem  fabulous"  (as  they  un- 
doubtedly do),  "  the  main  substance  of  it  is  certainly 
true,  for  it  expressly  appeareth  by  the  very  words  of 
his  charter,  that  he  gave  to  Osanna  the  prioress,  for 
the  establishing  of  the  religion  of  those  nuns  there, 
the  church  of  St.  Edith  of  Polesworth,  with  its  appur- 
tenances, so  that  the  Convent  of  Oldbury  (de  Aldo- 
beria)  should  remain  in  that  place,  and  afterwards 


170         THE  CONQUEROR  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

bestowed  on  them  the  whole  lordship  of  Polesworth, 
with  its  demesnes  in  Waverton,  which  grant  King 
Stephen  afterwards  confirmed." 

Robert  Marmion  had  a  wife  named  Milicent,  with 
whose  consent  he  gave  the  neighbouring  town  of 
Butegate  to  the  monks  of  Bardney,  in  the  county  of 
Lincoln,  for  the  health  of  the  souls  of  his  father  and 
mother  (unfortunately  not  naming  them),  his  own  and 
his  wife's  soul,  and  the  souls  of  their  heirs. 

No  particular  feats  of  arms  are  recorded  of  old 
Robert  or  Roger,  as  the  case  may  be,  either  at  Senlac 
or  elsewhere;  Wace  merely  says  that  in  the  great 
battle  he  and  Raoul  Taisson  de  Cingueleiz  behaved 
themselves  as  barons  should,  and  were  afterwards 
richly  rewarded. 

When  he  died  I  have  not  found,  but  if  deserving 
the  epithet  of  "old"  in  1066,  he  could  scarcely  have 
lived  till  the  reign  of  Henry  L,  who  granted  to  his 
son  and  heir,  Robert,  free  warren  in  all  his  lands  in 
Warwickshire,  as  Robert  his  father  had,  and  particu- 
larly at  Tamworth. 

This  second  Robert  possessed  the  strong  Castle  of 
Fontenai,  near  Caen,  called  from  its  ancient  lords 
Fontenai  le  Marmion,  to  distinguish  it  from  eight 
other  communes  of  the  same  name  in  Normandy  ;  and 
it  is  a  question  whether  the  "  Sire  de  Fontenei  "  men- 


EGBERT  MAKMION.  171 


tioned  by  "Wace  (1.  13,796)  was  the  lord  of  another 
Fontenai,  or,  as  it  has  been  suggested,  the  same 
person  he  has  previously  spoken  of  as  "  le  viel  Rogier 
Marmion."  Several  other  analogous  instances  occur 
in  the  "  Roman  de  Rou,"  and  1  think  its  author  has 
been  too  hastily  accused  of  inaccuracy. 

The  fate  of  the  second  Robert  Marmion,  who 
married  a  Maud  de  Beauchamp,  whom  1  have  not  yet 
been  able  to  affiliate,  is  deserving  notice.  "  Being  a 
great  adversary  to  the  Earl  of  Cliester,  who  had  a 
noble  seat  at  Coventry  in  the  eighth  of  Stephen,  he 
entered  the  priory  there,  which  was  but  a  little 
distance  from  that  Earl's  castle,  and  expelling  the 
monks,  fortified  it,  digging  in  the  fields  adjacent 
divers  deep  ditches  covered  over  with  earth,  to  the 
intent  that  such  as  made  approaches  thereto  should  be 
entrapped  ;  whereupon  it  so  happened  that  as  he  rode 
out  himself  to  reconnoitre  the  Earl  of  Chester's  forces 
that  began  to  draw  near,  he  fell  into  one  of  them  and 
broke  his  thigh,  so  that  a  common  soldier  presently 
seizing  on  him,  cut  off  his  head."'"' 

The  Mannions  held  the  manor  of  Scrivelsby,  in  the 
county  of  Lincoln,  by  the  service  of  performing  the  office 
of  champion  at  the  King's  coronation :  a  co-heir  of  the 
family  brought  Scrivelsby  and  the  championship  into 

*  Dugdale :  Baronage,  vol.  i. 


172         THE  CONQUEROR  AND   HIS   COMPANIONS. 

the  family  of  Ludlow,  and  thence  to  that  of  Dynioke, 
and  the  office  was  claimed  and  served  by  Sir  Henry 
Dynioke  of  Scrivelsby,  most  probably  for  the  last  time, 
at  the  coronation  of  his  Majesty  King  George  IV., 
July  19,  1821.  But  the  name  of  Marmion  indi- 
cates the  possession  originally  of  another  office,  as  its 
meaning  is  much  the  same  as  Despenser.  William 
Beauchamp  of  Bedford,  connected  with  the  Marmions, 
acted  as  grand  almoner  at  the  nuptials  of  King 
Henry  III. 

HUGH  DE  BEAUCHAMP. 

The  name  of  this  great  historical,  prolific,  and  wide- 
spreading  family,  of  which  no  less  than  ten  branches 
are  recorded  in  the  Baronage  of  England,  appears  in 
every  list  of  the  companions  of  the  Conqueror,  but  is 
not  mentioned  by  any  of  the  contemporary  writers.  Nor 
do  the  old  lists  in  which  it  occurs  give  the  baptismal 
names  of  the  persons  recorded,  and  we  have  therefore 
to  search  in  other  quarters  for  evidence  that  will  enable 
us  to  identify  the  particular  member  or  members  of 
the  family  who  may  be  fairly  presumed  to  have  been 
present  in  the  battle  of  Hastings. 

In  this  instance,  Domesday  supplies  us  with 
sufficient  information  to  justify  us  in  admitting  the 
probability  of  the  statement  of  MM.  de  Magny  and 


HUGH  DE  BEAUCHAMP.  173 

Delisle,  that  it  was  a  Hugh  cle  Beauchamp  who  for 
his  services  at  the  time  of  the  Conquest,  received 
four  lordships  in  Buckinghamshire,  and  forty-three, 
or  the  greatest  portion  of  them,  in  Bedfordshire, 
and  was  the  immediate  ancestor  of  the  Beauchamps  of 
Bedford. 

Of  his  own  parentage  I  have  found  no  note,  but  he 
was  most  probably  descended  from  the  Norman  lords 
of  Beauchamp  of  Avranches,  seated  between  that  city 
and  Granville,  and  a  kinsman  of  the  Robert  de  Beau- 
champ,  Viscount  of  Argues,  in  the  reign  of  Henry  L, 
who  is  first  mentioned  by  Orderic  under  the  year 
1171,  when  by  the  King's  order  he  seized  the  castle  of 
Elias  de  Saint-saens,  who  had  the  guardianship  of  the 
young  heir  of  Normandy,  William  Clito,  with  the 
object  of  arresting  that  prince  and  consigning  him  to 
captivity. 

By  his  wife,  unknown,  Hugh  de  Beauchamp  is  said 
to  have  had  three  sons  :  Simon,  who  died  without 
issue  ;  Pagan  or  Payne,  to  whom  William  Rufus  gave 
the  whole  barony  of  Bedford  with  the  castle,  which  was 
the  caput  or  head  of  the  barony,  and  Milo,  the 
ancestor  of  the  Beauchamps  of  Eaton.  Thus  Dugdale 
and  others  ;  but  there  is  undoubtedly  some  confusion 
here  which,  though  noticed  by  the  English  translator 
of  Orderic,  has  not  been  cleared  up  by  him. 


174         THE   CONQUEROR  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

The  De  Beauchamps  who  so  strongly  defended  Bed- 
ford Castle  were,-  according  to  Orderic,  the  sons  of 
Robert  de  Beauchamp,  and  not  of  Hugh,  as  above 
stated ;  and  if  this  Eobert  be  identical  with  the 
Viscount  of  Arques  we  have  just  heard  of,  the  whole 
line  of  Beauchamp  of  Bedford  is  thrown  into 
disorder. 

Orderic  says  that  King  Stephen,  against  the 
advice  of  his  brother  Henry,  Bishop  of  Winchester, 
laid  siege  to  Bedford,  but  as  it  was  the  season  of 
Christmas,  and  the  winter  very  rainy,  after  great 
exertions  he  had  no  success.  Indeed,  the  sons  of 
Robert  de  Beauchamp  defended  the  place  with  great 
resolution,  and  until  the  arrival  of  the  Bishop,  the 
King's  brother,  rejected  all  terms  of  submission  to 
Stephen.  Not  that  they  resolved  to  deny  the  fealty 
and  service  they  owed  to  him  as  their  liege  lord,  but 
having  heard  that  the  King  had  given  the  daughter  of 
Simon  de  Beauchamp  to  Hugh,  surnamed  the  Poor, 
with  her  father's  lordships,  they  feared  they  should 
lose  their  whole  inheritance.* 

Now  here  we  have  also  the  information  that  Simon, 
who  is  said  to  have  died  without  issue,  left  a  daughter, 
for  that  she  could  not  be  the  daughter  of  the  second 
Simon  in  the  pedigree,  son  of  Pagan,  first  baron  of 

*  Lib.  xiii.  cap.  xxxyi. 


HUGH  DE  BEAUCHAMP.  175 

Bedford,  is  clear,  as  that  Simon  was  living  in  the  eighth 
of  John,  1207. 

Dugdale,  upon  no  authority  that  I  can  see,  calls 
her  the  sister  of  the  defenders  of  Bedford,  whom  he 
describes  as  the  sons  of  the  second  Simon  de  Beau- 
champ,  steward  to  King  Stephen,  which  is  simply 
impossible,  for  the  reason  just  given.  We  have  there- 
fore three  different  fathers  to  choose  from  for  the 
progenitors  of  the  line  of  Eaton. 

Let  us  now  turn  to  the  account  of  the  siege  of 
Bedford  by  another  contemporary  writer.  The  ano- 
nymous author  of  the  Acts  of  King  Stephen,  says — 
"  The  King  having  held  his  court  during  Christmas 
(at  Dunstable)  with  becoming  splendour,  despatched 
messengers  to  Milo  de  Beauchamp,  who  by  royal 
licence  had  the  custody  of  the  Castle  of  Bedford,  with 
orders  that  he  should  hold  the  castle  of  Hugh,  and  do 
service  to  him  instead  of  the  King.  If  he  readily 
obeyed  this  command  he  should  have  honour  and 
reward,  but  if  he  withstood  it  in  any  manner,  he  was 
to  be  assured  that  it  would  be  his  ruin.  On  receipt  of 
the  royal  message,  Milo  replied  that  he  was  willing  to 
serve  the  King  as  his  true  knight  and  to  obey  his  com- 
mands, unless  he  attempted  to  deprive  him  of  the 
possessions  which  belonged  to  him  and  his  heirs  by 
hereditary  right ;  but  if  that  was  the  King's  intention, 


170         THE  CONQUEROR  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

and  lie  endeavoured  to  execute  it  by  force,  lie  would 
bear  the  King's  displeasure  as  best  he  could ;  and  as 
for  the  castle,  he  would  never  yield  it  unless  he  was 
driven  to  the  last    extremity.      Finding  how  things 
stood,  the  King's  indignation  was  roused  against  Milo, 
and  he  raised  an  army  from  all  parts  of  England  to  lay 
siege  to  Bedford.     Aware  of  his  approach,  Milo  swept 
off  all  the  provisions  he  could  lay  his  hands  on,  making 
violent  seizures  both  from  the  townsmen  and  the  in- 
habitants of  the  neighbourhood,  with  whom  before  he 
had  been  on  good  terms,  as  belonging  to  his  lordship. 
These  supplies  he  stored  in  the  castle,  and  securely 
closing  the  gates  he  for  this  time  excluded  the  King's 
people  without  any  loss  on  his  own  side.     The  King, 
however,  after  carefully  reconnoitring  the  fortifications, 
placed  under  cover  bands  of  archers  at  convenient  posts, 
with  directions  to  maintain  such  a  constant  discharge 
of  arrows  against  those  who  manned  the  battlements 
and  towers,  as  should  prevent  them  keeping  a  good 
lookout  and  hold  them  always  in  a  state  of  confusion. 
"  Meanwhile,  he  exerted  all   his  energies   to  have 
engines    constructed    for    filling    the    trenches    and 
battering   the  walls.     All   that   skill   and  ingenuity, 
labour   and   expense    could    compass    was     effected. 
Night  watches  were  posted  at  all  the  castle  gates  to 
prevent  any  communication  by  the  besieged  with  their 


HUGH  DE  BEAUCHAMP.  177 

friends  without,  or  the  introduction  of  provisions  or 
necessaries  within  the  fortress.  By  day  every  means 
were  employed  to  distress  and  annoy  the  enemy.  But 
the  castle  stood  on  a  very  high  mound,  surrounded 
by  a  solid  and  lofty  wall,  and  it  had  a  strong  and 
impregnable  keep,  containing  a  numerous  garrison  of 
stout  and  resolute  men,  so  that  the  expectation  of  soon 
taking  it  proved  abortive,  and  the  King  having  other 
affairs  on  his  hands  which  required  immediate 
attention,  withdrew,  leaving  the  greater  part  of  his 
army  to  carry  on  the  siege,  with  orders  that  in  case 
the  engines  could  not  effect  the  reduction  of  the  place, 
a  blockade  should  be  maintained  till  want  and  hunger 
compelled  its  surrender.  After  the  King's  departure 
the  besieging  army  continued  their  hostilities,  till  the 
garrison,  having  exhausted  their  provisions  and  finding 
their  strength  failing,  confessed  that  they  could  hold 
the  place  no  longer,  and  therefore  surrendered  it  to  the 
King  according  to  the  laws  of  war." 

Now,  in  this  circumstantial  account  we  hear  only 
of  Milo,  and  there  is  no  hint  as  to  his  parentage ;  but 
he  is  spoken  of  as  the  holder  of  Bedford  Castle  under 
the  King,  and  as  the  then  head  of  the  family  defending 
his  inheritance  for  himself  and  his  heirs.  If  he  had 
brothers  with  him,  which  Orderic's  language  implies, 
they  must  have  been  younger  sons  of  Robert  the 


178         THE  CONQUEROR  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

Viscount  and  Milo  his  successor ;  in  wliich  case,  how 
was  he  related  to  the  nameless  daughter  of  Simon,  the 
wife  of  Hugh  de  Mculcnt,  surnamed  "the  Poor," 
Earl  of  Bedford  ?  A  word,  by  the  way,  of  this 
surname,  the  explanation  of  which  is  clearly  given  by 
the  author  of  the  "  Acts  of  King  Stephen  "  in  a  subse- 
quent passage  in  his  history,  though  no  modern  writer 
appears  to  have  paid  attention  to  it. 

The  reader  is  told  that  King  Stephen  bestowed  the 
earldom  of  Bedford  on  Hugh,  surnamed  the  Pauper, 
and  naturally  imagines  that  the  said  Hugh  was  raised 
by  the  munificence  of  his  sovereign  from  a  state  of 
poverty  to  rank  and  affluence.  The  case,  however,  is 
exactly  the  reverse,  for  thus  says  the  author  just 
quoted  :  "  Hugh,  also  surnamed  '  The  Pauper,'  who 
by  royal  licence  possessed  the  earldom  of  Bedford, 
after  the  expulsion  of  Milo  de  Beauchamp,  conducted 
his  affairs  with  so  much  negligence,  like  the  careless 
and  effeminate  man  he  was,  that,  willing  or  not  will- 
ing, he  gave  up  the  task  to  Milo,  becoming  by  the 
righteous  judgment  of  God,  from  an  earl  a  simple 
knight,  and  from  that  shortly  a  penniless  man"  It 
was  not,  therefore,  Hugh  "  the  Poor/'  or  "  the  Pauper" 
who  was  made  the  Earl  of  Bedford,  but  Hugh  de 
Meulent,  third  son  of  Robert  Earl  of  Leicester,  by  a 
daughter  of  the  great  house  of  Vermandois,  a  man  of 


HUGH  DE  BEAUCHAMP.  179 

noble  birth,  who  being  created  Earl  of  Bedford, 
reduced  himself  by  his  own  folly  and  effeminacy  to  so 
miserable  a  condition  as  to  acquire  the  appellation 
which  has  been  associated  with  his  name  for  seven 
centuries,  and  not  unnaturally  misled  our  later 
annalists  and  annotators.* 

Still  we  are  unable  to  affiliate  Milo,  who,  whether 
the  son  of  Hugh  or  Robert  de  Beauchamp,  must,  if  the 
above  account  can  be  depended  upon,  have  been 
in  1137  in  possession  of  the  patrimonial  estates, 
including  the  Castle  of  Bedford,  for  which  he  was 
commanded  thenceforth  to  do  homage  to  Hugh  de 
Meulent  instead  of  to  the  King.  Pagan,  to  whom 
the  barony  of  Bedford  was  given  by  William  Rufus, 
must  then  have  been  dead ;  but  as  he  left  issue  by  his 
wife  Rohesia  two  sons,  Simon  and  Pagan,  the  eldest  of 
whom  confirmed  the  gifts  of  his  mother,  the  Countess 
Rohesia,  to  the  Priory  of  Chicksand,  and  to  the 
Abbey  of  Newenham,  founded  by  his  father,  and 
was  sheriff  of  Buckinghamshire  and  Bedfordshire  in 
the  reign  of  Richaxd  I.,  it  is  in  our  present  state  of 
information  impossible  to  account  for  the  position  of 

*  The  intelligent  English  translator  of  Orderic  even  observes  in  a 
note  (vol.  iv.,  p.  195),  "  Nor  was  it  any  wonder  that  the  sons  of  Roger 
(Robert  ?)  de  Beauchamp  should  oppose  the  alliance  of  their  cousin- 
german  with  a  person  of  such  mean  substance  as  this  Hugh."  An 
altogether  gratuitous  assumption. 

»  2 


180         THE  CONQUEROK  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

Milo  and  the  language  attributed  to  him.  He  appears 
to  have  been  living  in  the  reign  of  Henry  II.,  when, 
with  consent  of  Pagan,  his  heir  (not  his  son,  observe), 
he  gave  a  mill  at  Bedford  to  the  monks  of 
Bermondsey. 

But  I  must  hasten  to  the  line  of  Beauchamp  of 
Ehnley,  from  which  sprang  all  the  most  distinguished 
personages  of  this  proud  and  potent  family.  Here 
again  we  are  met  with  the  same  difficulty  at  starting, 
for  no  one  has  yet  been  able  to  show  the  relationship 
of  Walter,  the  earliest  known  of  this  branch,  to  Hugh, 
the  companion  of  the  Conqueror,  or  to  Kobert  the 
Viscount  of  Arques.  We  first  hear  of  him  as  the 
husband  of  Emmeline,  daughter  of  Urso  d'Abetot, 
and  sister  of  Roger,  who,  for  slaying  a  servant  of  King 
Henry  L,  was  banished  the  realm,  and  all  his  estates 
given  to  his  brother-in-law,  this  Walter  de  Beauchamp 
.(then  called  of  Bedford),  with  the  office  of  Dispensator 
Regis,  which  Robert,  the  brother  of  Urso,  had  for- 
merly held  ;  and  the  shrievalty  of  Worcestershire  to 
hold  as  freely  as  Urso  had  done,  confirming  also  to 
him  the  lands  given  him  by  Atheliza,  the  widow  of 
Urso.  Making  Elmley  Castle  in  Worcestershire  his 
chief  residence,  he  and  his  descendants  were  thence- 
forth known  as  Beauchamp  of  Elmley. 

William,  the  fourth  in  descent  from  Walter,  married 


HUGH  DE  BEAUCHAMP.  181 

Isabel,  sister  and  heiress  of  William  cle  Mauduit,  Earl  of 
Warwick,  who  brought  with  her  the  honours  and 
estates  of  that  noble  family  to  swell  the  fortunes  of 
the  already  powerful  and  affluent  one  of  Beauchamp. 
Henry,  the  sixth  earl  in  descent  from  William,  was 
created  Duke  of  Warwick  by  King  Henry  VI.  in 
1444,  and  by  the  marriage  of  his  sister  Anne  with 
Richard  Neville,  Earl  of  Salisbury,  he  became  Earl  of 
Warwick  in  right  of  his  wife,  and  is  well  known  to 
every  schoolboy  as  "  the  King  Maker." 

From  the  same  William  descended  the  branches  of 
Alcester  and  Powick,  and  the  co-heiresses  of  Richard, 
last  Lord  Beauchamp  of  Powick,  carried  the  repre- 
sentation into  the  families  of  Willoughby  de  Broke 
and  Lygon,  ancestors  of  the  present  Earls  of  Warwick 
and  Beauchamp.  As  in  my  previous  memoir  of  Nevil, 
I  must  express  my  regret  that  I  am  debarred  from 
even  briefly  describing  the  interesting  events  and 
gallant  exploits  of  the  most  important  members  of 
this  family  :  of  Guy  Earl  of  Warwick — not  the 
legendary  killer  of  the  Dun  Cow,  but  the  valiant 
leader  in  the  battle  of  Falkirk,  "  The  Black  Dog  of 
Arden,"  as  he  was  called  by  Piers  Gaveston,  an  insult 
which  cost  that  unworthy  favourite  his  life  upon  the 
Hill  of  Blacklow. 

Of  John,   son  of    that  Guy  who   bore   the   royal 


182         THE  CONQUEROR  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

standard  at  Cressy,  and  was  one  of  the  founders  of 
the  most  noble  Order  of  the  Garter,  or  of  Richard, 
an  account  of  whose  magnificent  array  and  knightly 
prowess  in  the  celebrated  jousts  at  Calais  would  of 
itself  occupy  more  space  than  the  longest  notice  I  can 
afford  to  give  to  the  most  important  companion  of  the 
Conqueror,  I  cannot  venture  to  speak.  I  must  even 
apologise  to  the  general  reader  for  the  genealogical 
details  which  I  have  been  led  into  by  the  imperfect 
and  perplexing  pedigree  of  the  early  Barons  of  Bedford. 

WILLIAM  DE   PERCY. 

The  name  of  Percy,  strange  to  say,  does  not  occur 
in  the  Roll  of  Battle  Abbey ;  for  I  cannot  agree  with 
my  old  friend  Sir  Bernard  Burke  in  his  discovery  of 
it  in  Percelay,  a  form  in  which  I  have  never  found  it 
in  any  authority.  Strange,  because  in  view  of  the 
numerous  interpolations  it  contains,  one  can  scarcely 
imagine  the  omission  of  a  name  so  distinguished  in 
Anglo-Norman  history.  But  for  those  manifest  addi- 
tions the  fact  of  the  absence  of  the  name  of  Percy 
would  go  far  to  establish  the  genuineness  of  the  Rolls, 
as  no  member  of  that  family  appears  to  have  fought 
at  Senlac,  and  William  dc  Percy  must  be  placed  in 
the  list  of  those  noble  Normans  who  "  came  over  with 
the  Conqueror  "on  his  return  to  England  in  1067, 


WILLIAM  DE  PERCY.  183 

amougst  whom  I  have  already  mentioned  Roger  de 
Montgoineri  and  Hugh  d'Avranches. 

William  de  Percy  was  the  sworn  brother-in-arms  of 
the  latter,  and  accompanied  him  to  England,*  and  who 
on  being  made  Earl  of  Chester  transferred  to  him  the 
lordship  of  Whitby,  with  the  extensive  domains 
attached  to  it  in  the  East  Riding  of  Yorkshire.  By 
what  service  he  obtained  the  vast  possessions  held  by 
him  at  the  time  of  .the  general  survey  we  have  no 
information,  an  old  manuscript,  quoted  by  Dugdale, 
simply  saying  that,  "  being  much  beloved  by  the 
King,"  he  enjoyed  them  through  his  bounty,  and  it  is 
not  till  we  arrive  at  the  reign  of  Stephen  that  we  hear 
of  any  remarkable  actions  attributed  to  his  descend- 
ants, when  his  great-great-grandson,  William  de 
Percy,  distinguished  himself  by  his  valour  in  the 
famous  battle  of  the  Standard. 

The  name  of  this  ancient  and  noble  family  was 
derived  from  their  great  fief  of  Perci,  near  Villedieu, 
in  Normandy,  and  according  to  tradition  they  were 
the  descendants  of  one  Mainfred,  a  Dane,  who  had 
preceded  Rollo  into  Neustria.  Geoffrey,  the  son  of 
Mainfred,  followed  him  in  the  service  of  Rollo,  and 
was  succeeded  in  rotation  by  William,  Geoffrey,  Wil- 
liam, and  Geoffrey,  all  born  in  Normandy,  the  latter 

*  Mon.  Ang.,  vo1.  i.,  p.  72. 


184         THE   CONQUEROR  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

Geoffrey  being  the  father  of  William  de  Percy,  the 
subject  of  this  notice,  and  of  Serlo,  his  brother,  the 
first  abbot  of  Whitby,  a  monastery  founded  by  William 
on  the  site  of  one  called  Skinshale,  which  had  been 
destroyed  by  Inguar  and  Hubba. 

Upon  this  abbey  William  bestowed  the  towns  of 
Seaxby  and  Everley ;  but  resumed  and  regranted  them 
to  Ealph  de  Everley,  his  esquire,  who  had  been  in  his 
service  many  years. 

Abbot  Serlo,  his  brother,  feeling  injured  by  this 
proceeding,  made  his  complaint  to  William  Eufus,  with 
whom  he  had  been  on  terms  of  intimacy  during  the 
reign  of  his  father,  and  the  King  ordered  restitution  to 
be  made.  Serlo,  however,  was  not  satisfied  with  the 
restoration  of  the  towns,  and  having  no  confidence  in 
his  brother,  determined  to  quit  Whitby  and  establish 
himself  where  he  should  hold  under  the  King  only, 
and  be  out  of  his  brother's  power.  He  therefore 
legged  of  Rufus  six  carucates  of  land  in  Hakerias  and 
Northfield,  and  translated  thither  part  of  the  commu- 
nity of  Whitby. 

William  de  Percy  married  a  lady  named  Emma  de 
Port,  "  in  discharging  of  his  conscience,"  says  our 
ancient  writer,  she  being  "  very  heire  "  to  the  estates 
given  to  him  by  William  the  Conqueror,  and  in  1096r 
having  joined  the  first  Crusade  in  company  with 


EOBEET  FITZ  ERNEIS.  183 

Eobert  Court-heuse,  died  at  Montjoye,  near  Jerusalem, 
the  celebrated  eminence  so  named  by  the  Christian 
Pilgrims,  because  from  there  they  first  caught  sight 
of  the  sacred  city.  His  body  was  brought  back 
to  England,  and  buried  in  the  chapter  house  at 
Whitby. 

This  Anglo-Norman  race  of  the  Percys  became  ex- 
tinct in  the  male  line  at  the  close  of  the  12th  century 
by  the  deaths,  without  issue,  of  the  four  sons  of  his 
grandson  William,  when  this  great  inheritance  was 
divided  between  their  two  sisters  and  co-heirs,  Maud, 
wife  of  William  de  Mauduit,  Earl  of  Warwick,  who 
died  without  issue,  and  Agnes,  on  whom  the  whole 
possessions  of  the  Percys  in  England  devolved,  and 
passed  with  her  hand  to  Joceleyn  de  Louvaine,  brother 
of  Adeliza,  Queen  of  Henry  L,  who  assumed  the  name 
of  Percy,  retaining  the  arms  of  his  own  family. 

From  the  issue  of  this  marriage  descended  those 
great  Earls  of  Northumberland  and  Worcester,  whose 
deeds  and  fortunes  are  interwoven  with  the  most  im- 
portant portions  of  our  history  from  the  reign  of 
Henry  III.  to  that  of  Charles  IT. 

EOBEET  FITZ  EENEIS. 

Here  we  have  a  companion  of  the  Conqueror  who 
fought  and  fell  at  Senlac — one  of  the  very  few  recorded 


186         THE   CONQUEROE  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

to  have  done  so — a  most  remarkable  fact,  for  surely 
the  names  of  men  who  died  in  the  hour  of  victory 
were  as  deserving  of  commemoration  as  those  of  the 
survivors.  That  a  list  of  the  killed,  if  not  of  the 
wounded,  should  not  have  been  specially  drawn  up, 
and  preserved  "  in  memoriam  "  by  the  pious  monks  of 
Battle,  or,  at  any  rate,  distinguished  by  some  mark  in 
the  Koll,  is  to  me  incomprehensible,  in  days,  too,  when 
mortuary  Rolls  were  compiled  in  nearly  every  mon- 
astic establishment.  I  cannot  help  thinking  some  such 
document  has  unfortunately  perished,  although  the 
silence  of  Wace  and  of  all  other  chroniclers  respecting 
the  slain  at  Senlac  may  be  adduced  in  proof  of  the 
little  regard  paid  at  that  period  to  the  subject. 
Robert  Fitz  Erneis,  the  only  Norman  mentioned  by 
Wace  as  having  fallen  in  battle  was,  as  his  name 
imports,  the  son  of  Erneis,  a  collateral  descendant  of 
the  family  of  Taisson,  by  his  wife  Ha  wise,  sister  of 
Fulk  d'Aunou.  His  death  is  thus  described  by 
Wace  :  "  Robert  Fitz  Erneis  let  fall  his  lance,  took 
his  shield  and  galloped  towards  the  standard, 
sword  in  hand,  hewing  down  with  its  trenchant 
blade  an  Englishman  who  stood  before  it,  and, 
fighting  his  way  through  many  others,  reached  the 
standard,  and  endeavoured  to  cut  it  down,  but  the 
English  surrounded  it,  and  killed  him  with  their 


WILLIAM  PATEY  DE  LA  LAXDE.  187 

guisarmes.*  He  was  found  on  the  spot,  when  they 
afterwards  sought  for  him,  lying  dead  at  the  stan- 
dard's foot." 

He  married  a  lady  named,  like  his  mother,  Hawise, 
and  had  a  son  called  after  himself  Eobert  Fitz  Erneis, 
who,  in  a  charter  printed  in  Gallia  Christiana  (vol.  ix. 
Instrumentum,  334),  mentions  his  father's  death : 
"  Eodem  vero  Patre  meo  in  Anglia  occiso." 

WILLIAM  PATEY  DE  LA  LANDE. 
"  William  Patric  de  la  Lande  called  aloud  for  King 
Harold,  saying  that  if  he  could  see  him  he  would 
appeal  him  of  perjury.  He  had  seen  him  at  La 
Lande,  and  Harold  had  rested  there  on  his  way 
through,  when  he  was  taken  to  the  Duke,  then  at 
Avranches,  on  his  road  to  Brittany.  The  Duke  made 
him  a  knight  there,  and  gave  him  and  his  companions 
arms  and  garments,  and  sent  him  against  the  Bretons. 
Patric  stood  armed  by  the  Duke's  side,  and  was  much 
esteemed  by  him."  (Rom.  de  Ron,  1.  13,723.)  Thus 
far  Wace  :  but  the  correctness  of  his  account  has  been 
questioned  by  Le  Prevost,  who  considers  it  contradic- 
tory to  the  evidence  of  Guillaurne  de  Poitiers,  who 
says  the  Duke  received  Harold  at  Eu,  and  also  of  the 

*  A  fearful  weapon,  combining  a  pike  and  a  curved  blade  like  that 
of  a  reaping  nook.  Several  may  be  seen  in  the  Tower.  No  such 
weapon,  however,  is  depicted  in  the  Bayeux  Tapestiy. 


183         THE  CONQUEROK  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

Bayeux  Tapestry,  which  represents  Harold  being 
surrendered  to  the  Duke  of  Normandy  by  the  Count 
of  Ponthieu  in  person,  observing  also  that  the  Duke 
did  not  send  Harold  against  the  Bretons,  but  took  him 
with  him.  This  is  rather  hypercritical,  and  the  whole 
story  of  this  campaign  is  one  of  the  most  confused  in 
the  annals  of  Normandy,  no  light  being  thrown  upon 
it  by  those  of  Brittany.  Duke  William,  contem- 
plating the  war  with  Conan,  might  have  been  at 
Avranches,  on  the  borders  of  Brittany,  when  the  news 
of  Harold's  captivity  reached  him ;  and  the  demand 
for  his  release  despatched  thence  to  Count  Wido, 
William,  with  his  usual  rapidity  of  action,  following 
almost  on  the  heels  of  his  messenger  to  Eu;  on  the 
frontier  of  Ponthieu,  to  receive  the  Saxon  prince,  or 
enforce  his  demand  if  not  promptly  complied  with. 

La  Lande  Patry  is  in  the  arrondissement  of  Dom- 
front,  not  far  from  Avranches,  and  its  lord  may 
have  first  seen  Harold  when  passing  with  the  Duke 
to  Avranches,  on  their  road  to  Brittany,  instead  of  on 
his  journey  from  Beaurain.  There  is  no  point  of 
importance  involved  in  this  little  discrepancy. 

The  time  and  place  of  William's  bestowal  of  knight- 
hood, and  giving  arms  to  Harold,  is  a  question  of 
more  interest,  as  the  fact  represented  in  the  Bayeux 
Tapestry  is  distinctly  stated  by  Wace  in  the  passage 


WILLIAM  PATRY  DE  LA  LANDE.  189 

I  have  quoted  to  have  occurred  at  Avranches  pre- 
vious to  the  setting  out  of  the  expedition ;  and  I  am 
inclined,  with  all  due  deference  to  the  contrary 
opinion  of  Mr.  Freeman,  to  believe  such  was  the  case. 
Harold,  when  embarking  with  hawk  and  hounds  on 
a  pleasurable  excursion,  was  not  dreaming  of  warfare, 
and  was  consequently  unprovided  with  armour.  It 
was  a  positive  necessity  to  present  him  with  helm  and 
hauberk,  shield  and  lance,  before  he  entered  the 
enemy's  country,  and  simultaneously  with  the  bestowal 
of  that  Norman  knighthood,  which,  while  ostensibly 
an  honour,  was  one  of  the  toils  in  which  the  artful 
Duke  entangled  his  captive  guest.*  William  Patry 
de  la  Lande,  one  of  the  Duke's  vassals  whose  fief  was 
nearest  to  the  enemy's  frontier,  would  naturally  have 
been  summoned  to  join  his  suzerain  with  whatever 
power  he  was  bound  to  bring,  and  was  most  probably 
a  witness  of  the  ceremony  when,  according  to  the 
usual  formula,  Harold  must  have  taken  the  oaths  of 
chivalry.  It  is  equally  probable,  as  we  are  assured, 

*  The  position  the  representation  of  this  incident  occupies  in  the 
Bayeux  Tapestry  cannot  be  used  as  an  argument  in  favour  of  the 
opinion  expressed  by  Mr.  Freeman,  as  chronological  order  is  not  in- 
variably observed  in  that  valuable  relic.  For  instance,  the  funeral  of 
Eil ward  the  Confessor  precedes  his  death ;  and  I  have  also  to  observe 
that  the  figure  of  Duke  William  giving  arms  to  Harold  appears  to 
have  been  squeezed,  if  I  may  so  express  myself,  into  that  portion  of 
the  Tapestry,  as  though  the  insertion  had  been  an  after-thought — 
the  correction  of  an  omission  in  the  nearest  place  available. 


J90         THE  CONQUEKOB  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

that  Patry  was  particularly  a  favourite  with  his  Duke, 
and  that  he  was  also  a  witness  to  the  oath  said  to  have 
been  taken  by  Harold  somewhere  or  other,  for  no  two 
authorities  are  agreed,  by  which  he  bound  himself  to 
be  "  William's  Man,"  and  to  acknowledge  his  right 
to  the  crown  of  England  on  the  death  of  King 
Edward  the  Confessor.  Who  then  so  likely  to  accuse 
Harold  of  perjury  as  the  Lord  of  La  Lande  Patry  ? 

His  name  may  be  indicated  by  "De  la  Lande"  in 
the  Roll  of  Battle,  and  another  catalogue,  but  history 
is  silent  respecting  him  or  his  descendants  subsequent 
to  the  Conquest,  and  I  have  nothing  to  add  to  the 
brief  but  suggestive  notice  of  him  by  the  Canon  of 
Bayeux. 


CHAPTER  VIII. 


WILLIAM  CRISPIN. 
AVENEL  DE  BIARZ. 
FULK  D'AULNAY. 


BERNARD  DE  ST.  VALERI. 
ROBERT  D'OILEY. 
JEAN  D'IVRI. 


WILLIAM  CRISPIN. 

IT  is  with  great  diffidence  that  I  offer  any  observa- 
tions whatever  on  this  very  mysterious  family,  from 
whom  so  many  of  the  noblest  houses  in  England  claim 
a  descent. 

Wace  enumerates  amongst  the  combatants  at 
Senlac,  "  William  ki  Ton  dit  Crespin,"  and  he  has 
previously  mentioned  "  Gil  ki  done  gardont  Tillieres," 
who,  if  not  the  same  personage,  must  have  been  one 
of  the  family,  and  is  presumed  by  M.  le  Prevost  to 
have  been  Gilbert  Crispin,  second  of  that  name, 
brother,  according  to  some  genealogists,  of  William, 
who  was  Seigneur  de  Bec-en-Caux,  and  whose  name 


192         THE  CONQUEROR  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

appears  in  charters  of  the  dates  of  1080  and  1082. 
But  if  brothers,  of  whom  were  they  the  sons  ? 

The  late  Mr.  Stacey  Grimaldi,  who  considered  himself 
a  collateral  descendant  of  the  family  of  Crispin,  or 
Crespin  as  indifferently  written,  took  great  pains  to 
establish  the  fact,  and  published  in  the  "  Gentleman's 
Magazine"  for  October,  1832,  a  pedigree,  founded  on 
his  researches,  differing  from  that  set  forth  in  the 
appendix  to  the  works  of  Lanfranc  by  D'Achery.  His 
son,  the  Rev.  Alexander  B.  Grimaldi,  of  Eastry,  Kent, 
has  most  kindly  intrusted  to  me  what  I  may  call  the 
working  papers  of  his  father ;  but  unfortunately  they 
do  not  throw  sufficient  light  on  the  point  in  question. 
Mr.  Stapleton,  in  his  illustrations  of  the  Norman  Rolls 
of  the  Exchequer,  only  deals  with  the  later  genera- 
tions, and  Le  Prevost,  in  his  notes  on  Wace,  simply 
makes  a  statement  differing  from  that  of  Mr.  Grimaldi, 
without  citing  any  evidence  in  support  of  it. 

According  to  the  latter,  Crispinus,  Baron  of  Bee, 
was  the  son  of  Crispina,  daughter  of  Rollo,  by 
Grimaldus,  Prince  of  Monaco.  By  his  wife  Heloise 
of  Guynes  and  Boulogne,  Crispinus  had  five  sons,  one 
of  whom,  Rollo,  was  the  father  of  Goisfrid  cle  Bee  or 
Marescal,  and  Toustain  Fitz  Rou,  the  standard-bearer 
at  Hastings.  Another,  named  Gilbert  Crispin,  first  suc- 
ceeded his  father  as  Baron  of  Bee,  and  had  three 


WILLIAM  CTJSPIN.  193 

sons,  William,  Gilbert,  and  Milo,  all  present  at 
Hastings.  The  usual  provoking  omission  of  the 
names  and  families  of  the  wives  of  these  noble 
Normans  renders  it  impossible  to  verify  their  descent, 
and  deprives  genealogy  of  half  its  interest.  In  this 
particular  case  it  is  exceedingly  deplorable,  as  any 
information  respecting  the  female  members  of  this 
family  would  tend  to  clear  up  the  mystery  still 
involving  those  of  Malet,  Lincoln,  Roumare,  Tanker- 
ville,  and  others,  as  I  have  already  pointed  out. 

We  may  fairly  consider,  however,  that  William 
Crispin  I.  was  the  son  of  Gilbert,  Baron  of  Bee 
and  Castellan  of  Tillieres,  who  defended  that  fortress 
against  the  French  King  Henry,  and  reluctantly  sur- 
rendered it  to  him  by  command  of  the  boy-duke 
.  William  at  the  commencement  of  his  reign.  Ac- 
cording to  Pere  Anselm,  who  quotes,  however,  no 
authority,  his  mother  was  Gonnor,  sister  of  Fulk 
d'Aunou,  the  companion  of  the  Conqueror.  She  was 
also  the  mother  of  four  other  children — Gilbert,  who 
succeeded  his  father  as  Baron  of  Bee;  Robert,  who 
died  without  issue  ;  and  two  daughters — Emma, 
married  to  Pierre  de  Conde,  and  Elise,  wife  of  Robert 
Malet. 

According  to  the  same  genealogist,  William  Crispin 
who  fought    at    Senlac    married,  previous   to   1077, 


VOL.  II. 


194         THE  CONQUEEOE-  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

Eva,  the  daughter  of  Simon  de  Montfort  1'Aumary,  by 
whom  he  had  William  Crispin  II.,  the  doughty 
warrior  at  the  battle  of  Bremule,  and  Gilbert,  who 
became  a  monk  in  the  Abbey  of  Bee,  and  eventually 
Abbot  of  Westminster. 

William  Crispin  I.,  the  subject  of  this  memoir,  we 
have  previously  heard  of  as  one  of  the  victorious 
leaders  in  the  murderous  battle  of  Mortemer,  1054. 
He  must  have  been  a  very  young  man  at  that  time, 
and  probably  it  was  the  first  combat  of  consequence 
he  had  ever  been  engaged  in.  He  was  living  in 
1082,  when  he  witnessed  the  foundation  charters  of 
the  Conqueror  to  the  Abbeys  of  St.  Stephen  and  the 
Holy  Trinity,  at  Caen,  and  the  confirmation  of  the 
privileges  of  the  Abbey  of  Fontenville,  in  the  same 
year,  at  the  council  held  at  Oistel,  near  Rouen.  No 
particular  exploit  is  recorded  of  him  at  Senlac,  nor  do 
we  hear  of  his  being  employed  in  any  military  service 
either  in  England  or  Normandy  after  the  Conquest. 
He  was  probably  deceased  before  1085,  as  his  name 
does  not  appear  in  Domesday,  Milo  Crispin,  a  brother 
of  his,  according  to  Mr.  Grimaldi,  but  not  named  by 
Pere  Anselm,  being  at  the  time  of  the  survey  in  pos- 
session of  certain  estates,  some  of  which  may  have 
been  granted  previously  to  William. 

His  brother  Gilbert  was  probably,  as  already  men- 


WILLIAM  CRISPIN.  195 

tioned,  the  personage  "who  held  Tillieres  "  in  1066, 
and  followed  his  feudal  lord  to  England.  He  and 
Henry  de  Ferrers  charged  the  English  together,  each 
having  brought  a  large  company  into  the  field.  All 
who  opposed  them  were  either  killed  or  captured. 
"The  earth  trembled  beneath  them"  (Rom.  de  Ron, 
1.  13,503).  From  him  descended  the  Seigneurs  de 
Tillieres,  one  of  whom,  Gilbert,  presumably  his  son 
and  heir,  was  the  second  husband  of  Eleanore  de 
Vitre,  afterwards  wife  of  William  Fitz  Patrick,  first 
Earl  of  Salisbury. 

Milo,  the  tenant  in  Domesday,  is  not  attempted  to 
be  affiliated  by  Dugdale,  and  is  altogether  ignored  by 
Anselm.  I  do  not  find  him  in  any  way  alluded  to  by 
Wace  as  having  been  in  the  battle,  and  Mr.  Grimaldi 
alone  makes  him  a  brother  of  William  and  Gilbert. 
Whoever  he  might  be,  he  was  a  very  substantial  per- 
sonage, possessing  no  less  than  eighty-eight  lordships 
in  England  at  the  time  of  the  survey,  and,  by  marriage 
with  Maud,  daughter  of  Robert  d'Oiley,  becoming  Lord 
of  Wallingford,  in  Berkshire,  the  castle  whereof  he 
made  his  principal  seat. 

But  I  must  now  return  to  the  sisters  of  William  and 
Gilbert,  one  of  whom,  called  by  Anselm  Elise,  he 
marries  to  Robert  Malet.  This  is  important,  if  true, 
for  in  that  case  she  may  be  the  sister  of  William 

o  2 


196         THE   CONQUEROR  AND  HIS   COMPANIONS. 


Crispin,  otherwise  named  Hesilia  (Elisia  ? ),  mother, 
according  to  the  pedigree  in  D'Achery,  of  the  William 
Malet  who  fought  at  Senlac,  and  gave  Conteville 
(however  he  came  by  it)  to  the  Abbey  of  Bee. 

I  have  pointed  out  the  curious  association  of  the 
names  of  Heiieve,  mother  of  the  Conqueror,  and  Gil- 
bert Crispin.  Is  it  probable  that  she  survived  Herluin, 
and  married  secondly  Gilbert,  Baron  of  Bee-Crispin 
and  Castellan  of  Tillieres,  and  that  Conteville  passed  in 
this  way  by  his  daughter,  Hesilia  or  Elisia,  to  her  son 
William  Malet,  who  gives  it,  you  observe,  to  the  Abbey 
of  Bee,  and  not  to  Gerstein,  founded  by  Herluin  ? 

We  have  no  dates  or  evidence  whatever  of  the 
marriage  of  Gilbert  with  Gonnor,  or  of  their  decease, 
and  where  there  is  so  much  confusion  and  incertitude 
a  little  speculation  is  perhaps  allowable  when  pro- 
voked by  evidence  hitherto  apparently  disregarded. 
There  is  a  charter  of  foundation  of  the  priory  of 
Chateauceaux,  printed  by  Morice  in  his  "  Histoire  de 
Bretagne,"  Preuves,  torn,  i.,  pp.  384-5,  which  contains 
some  interesting  information  respecting  a  branch  of 
the  Crispin  family  to  be  identified.  In  English  it 
would  run  thus  :  I,  Gaufridus  (Geoffrey  or  Godfrey) 
Crispin,  Lord  of  Chateauceaux,  for  my  salvation  and 
the  redemption  of  the  soul  of  my  beloved  wife  Mar- 
garet, and  with  the  assent  and  authority  of  my 


WILLIAM  CRISPIX.  197 


brothers,  Herluin,  Onderic,  Joscelin,  and  Ralph,  &c. ; 
and  the  gift  is  witnessed  by  Theobald,  his  eldest  son, 
the  lady  Girbergia,  his  mother,  and  Simon  Crispin, 
his  brother ;  a  William  Crispin  being  also  named  in  the 
charter.  Le  Prevost,  in  his  notes  to  Wace,  strenuously 
opposes  the  theory  of  Mr.  Grimalcli,  who  derives 
Toustain  Fitz  Rou  and  Geoffrey  de  Bee  from  the  same 
stock  as  the  Crispins.  "William  Crispin,"  he  says, 
"  first  of  the  name,  Lord  of  Bee-Crispin,  a  celebrated 
barony  which  has  given  its  name  to  the  two  com- 
munes of  Notre  Dame  and  of  St.  Martin  du  Bee- 
Crispin,  near  Montvilliers.  This  family  has  nothing 
in  common  with  Toustain,  standard-bearer  to  the  Duke 
at  Hastings,  and  originally  of  Bec-aux-Cauchois  ;"  the 
former  being  in  the  arrondissement  of  Havre,  and  the 
latter  in  that  of  Yveto. 

This  is  very  authoritative,  but  requires  some  docu- 
mentary evidence  for  its  support.  In  the  charter  to 
Chateauceaux  we  find  a  Gaufridus  Crispin,  who  may 
be  the  brother  of  Toustain,  though  his  name  is  not 
mentioned  ;  in  which  case  Girbergia  would  be  the 
wanting  wife  of  Rollo.  But  unfortunately  she  is  not 
named  by  Mr.  Grimaldi,  and  Gaufridus  does  not  name 
his  father,  so  that  we  are  still  unable  to  decide  that 
controversy. 

Toustain  Fitz  Rou  is  said  to  have  been  the  grand- 


198         THE  CONQUEKOK  AND  HIS   COMPANIONS. 


father  of  Walkelin  Malet.  I  am  weary  of  saying,  "  is 
said,"  but  as  that  would  take  us  two  generations 
below  the  Conquest,  I  need  not  pursue  that  line  or 
"  bestow  my  tediousness  "  any  further  on  the  general 
reader. 

I  shall  therefore  conclude  my  notice  of  the  Crispins 
by  observing,  that  from  Geoffrey  de  Bee,  or  Marescal 
of  Domesday,  Mr.  Grimaldi  derives  the  present  family 
of  Fitzwilliam. 

AVENEL  DE   BIARZ. 

t 

The  Seigneur  de  Biarz  is  twice  mentioned  by  Wace 
in  his  "  Roman  de  Rou."  First  in  company  with 
Eichard  d'Avranches — 

"  D'Avranchin  i  fu  Bicharz 
Ensemble  od  li  cil  de  Biarz  "  (1.  13,600-1). 

and  subsequently  thus — 

"  Des  Biarz  i  fu  Avenals"  (1.  13,632). 

Which  might  or  might  not  be  the  same  person,  or 
simply  that  there  was  more  than  one  of  that  family  in 
the  Duke's  army.  "There  were  the  Avenels  of  the 
Biarz."  Les  Biards  being  a  bourg  on  the  banks  of  the 
Selune,  canton  of  Isigny,  arrondissement  of  Mortaiii. 

The  companion  of  the  Conqueror  is  assumed  by  Le 
Provost  to  have  been  William  Avenel,  Seigneur  des 
Biards,  who  was  seneschal  of  Robert  Comte  de 


AVENEL  DE  BIAEZ.  193 

Mortain,  the  Duke's  half-brother,  and  would  therefore 
probably  follow  his  lord  to  the  wars.  There  is  no 
reason,  however,  that  one  or  more  of  his  brothers  (he 
appears  to  have  had  five)  should  not  have  accom- 
panied him. 

The  name  of  Avenel  does  not  occur  in  either  of 
the  Kolls  of  Battle  Abbey,  but  it  is  included  in 
Brompton's  List,  and  the  rhyming  one  of  Leland.  A 
sub-tenant  of  that  name  occurs  also  in  Domesday, 
holding  half  a  hide  of  land  in  the  hundred  of 
Cendovre,  under  Roger  de  Montgomeri,  Earl  of 
Shrewsbury  ;  but  we  trace  no  grants  from  the  Con- 
queror to  any  one  of  the  family  in  reward  of  their 
services  at  Senlac,  a  circumstance  which  excites  the 
surprise  of  the  authors  of  "  Les  Recherches,"  to  whom 
we  are  indebted  for  many  particulars  of  the  early  lords 
of  the  Biards  or  Es-Biards. 

According  to  Vincent  de  Beauvais,  an  historian  of 
the  thirteenth  century,  one  Harold  Avenel  was  the 
first  of  the  family  who  settled  in  Normandy,  whither 
he  had  accompanied  Rolf,  of  whom  he  was  a  kinsman 
as  well  as  of  the  Paynels,  the  Taissons,  the  Giffards, 
and  others  of  Scandinavian  origin,  and  his  statement, 
though  not  always  to  be  relied  upon,  is  in  this 
instance  fairly  supported  by  documentary  evidence. 
In  a  charter  by  Hugues,  the  son  of  John  de  Roceto, 


200         THE  CONQUEROR  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

A.D.  1035,  granting  to  the  Abbey  of  Marmoutiers  the 
Church  of  St.  Martin  de  Belesme,  the  gift  is  declared 
to  be  made  with  the  consent  of  Odo,  brother  of 
Henry  I.  King  of  France,  of  Geoffrey  Count  of 
Anjou,  Ivo  Bishop  of  Se'ez,  and  of  the  grantor's  kins- 
man, Herve  de  Braviard  (Biuard,  or  Biard).  In 
another  charter,  dated  1067,  having  reference  to  a 
dispute  respecting  the  above  donation,  the  name  recurs 
of  Herve,  the  kinsman  of  Hugues  de  Roceto,  in  con- 
j  unction  with  that  of  a  Sigemberg  des-Biarz,  appa- 
rently the  son  of  Herve,  who  also  seems  to  have  been 
the  father  of  Ormellinus,  surnamed  Avenellus,  who, 
with  the  consent  of  his  wife  Avitia,  in  1060  concedes 
a  third  of  his  rights  on  the  Church  of  St  Martin  de 
Say.*  Sigemberg  des  Biarz  dying  without  male  issue, 
we  find  the  sons  of  his  brother  Osmellinus  joining 
the  name  of  Biarz  to  that  of  Avenel,  borne  by  their 
father. 

We  thus  arrive  at  the  epoch  of  the  Conquest,  when 
it  appears  that  Sigemberg  des  Biarz  was  still  living, 
and  possibly  Ormellinus  his  brother  also,  as  he  and 
his  wife  Avitia  were  benefactors  to  St.  Martin  de  Say 
in  1060.  Sigemberg  if  not  too  old  might  therefore  be 
in  the  battle,  and  be  the  "Seigneur"  de  Biarz  of 
Wace,  distinguished  from  the  "  Avenels,"  his  nephews, 
*  Gall.  Christ  Instr.,  col.  1-53. 


AVEXEL  DE  BIARZ.  201 

none  of  whom  could  have  succeeded  to  the  lordship  of 
Des  Biards  before  1067. 

These  Avenels,  sons  of  Ormellinus  and  Avitia  were, 
as  I  have  already  intimated,  six  in  number.  William, 
the  seneschal,  selected  by  Le  Prevost  as  the  com- 
batant at  Senlac;  Ranulf,  living  in  1081  ;  Joel,  Abbot 
of  La  Couture  in  1081  ;  Walter,  living  in  1081,  and 
Herve  and  Traslen,  or  Gradin,  both  living  in  1106. 

William  Avenel  des  Biarz  in  1082,  in  conjunction 
with  his  brother,  gave  the  Church  of  Ye'zens  and  the 
Priory  of  Les  Biarz  to  the  Abbey  of  La  Couture  in  the 
diocese  of  Mans,  of  which  his  brother  Joel  was  the 
fifth  abbot ;  and  Eanulf,  his  other  brother,  caused  the 
gift  to  be  confirmed  by  his  son  and  heir,  Rainold 
Avenel,  at  that  date  in  his  childhood.  The  same 
William  Avenel  also  witnesses  the  charter  of  Robert, 
Comte  de  Mortain,  by  which  he  founds  a  prebend  in 
the  college  of  St.  Evroult  for  the  priory  of  Mortain  in 
10S8.  His  wife  is  unknown,  but  his  sons  by  her  were 
William,  second  of  that  name,  Richard,  Robert,  and 
•  Hugh  AveneL  From  William  II.  descended  the 
Avenels  of  France,  the  elder  branch  of  wrhich  family 
terminated  in  the  male  line  with  the  death  of  his 
great-grandson  in  the  fourteenth  century,  whose 
daughter  Guillenine  brought  the  whole  of  the  Barony 
des  Biards  to  the  house  of  Le  Sotherel. 


202         THE  CONQTJEKOK  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

How  the  Avenel  of  Domesday  was  connected  with 
William  the  Seneschal,  and  from  which  of  his  brothers 
the  English  branch  descended,  remains  yet  undecided  ; 
but  an  Avenel  of  Hacldon  witnessed  the  foundation 
charter  of  the  Priory  of  Linton  in  Nottinghamshire  by 
William  Peverel  in  the  reign  of  Henry  L,  in  com- 
pany with  Henry  de  Ferrers,  Ealph  Ansleyn,  and 
others. 

The  same  Avenel  by  his  own  charter  granted  to 
that  priory  two  manors  which  formed  part  of  his 
domain  of  Haddon.  Another  charter  by  William 
Peverel  in  the  register  of  Lenton  is  witnessed  by  a 
William  Avenel,  and  a  Kobert  Avenel  subscribes  the 
foundation  charter  of  the  Abbey  of  St.  James  at 
Welbeck  ;  and  I  am  inclined  to  believe  that  Ranulf, 
•one  of  the  younger  brothers  of  William  the  Seneschal, 
was  the  progenitor  of  the  English  Avenels. 

Vincent  has  transcribed  a  charter  of  William,  the 
son  of  William  Avenel,  wherein  he  names  Richard  de 
Vernon  and  Simon  Basset  as  the  husbands  of  his  two 
daughters  and  heirs,  with  whom  they  had  lands  in 
Haddon  and  Welbeck,  and  we  obtain  the  name  of  the 
daughter  who  married  Richard  de  Vernon  from  a 
charter  of  their  son  William  de  Vernon,  who  calls  his 
mother  Avicia  Avenel,  a  family  name  which  we  can 
trace  from  the  wife  of  Ormellinus  in  the  eleventh 


FULK  D'AULNAY.  203 


century   to   the   Avicia    Avenel   who    married   John 
Rollesly  in  the  fourteenth. 

By  the  above  charter  we  see  how  H  addon  passed 
from  the  Avenels  to  the  Vernons.  The  romantic  but 
authentic  story  of  the  flight  of  the  fair  Dorothy, 
daughter  and  co-heir  of  Sir  George  Vernon,  with  Sir 
John  Manners,  from  Haddon  Hall,  has  been  told  too 
often  to  call  for  repetition  here,  and  is  only  referred  to 
in  illustration  of  the  Norman  descent  of  the  Dukes  of 
Rutland  from  Ormellinus,  "  qui  cognominhabitus  Ave- 
nellus,"  through  the  baronial  house  of  Vernon,  a  scion 
of  which  also  demands  our  notice,  under  the  name  of 

FULK  D'AULNAY. 

The  Sire  "d'Alnei"  mentioned  by  Wace  (Rom.  de 
Ron,  1.  13,775)  receives  but  little  attention  from  either 
the  French  or  the  English  commentators  of  the  Norman 
poet,  and  they  have  made  no  attempt  to  identify  him. 
There  are  several  communes  of  that  name  in  Normandy, 
one  of  which,  Aulnay  I'Abbaye,  near  Caen,  belonged 
•  in  the  twelfth  century  to  the  family  of  Say,  a 
member  of  which  was  present  at  Senlac ;  Monsieur 
de  Gerville  mentions  also  a  Laulne  near  Lessay, 
latinised  de  Alno,  but  I  find  no  conclusive  evidence  as 
to  the  fief  or  locality  from  which  the  Sire  d'Alnei  of 
AVace  derived  his  appellation. 


204         THE  CONQUEROR  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

The  continuator  of  Guillaume  de  Junaieges,  however, 
enlightens  us  as  to  his  parentage ;  a  point  of  more 
importance.  As  I  have  already  stated,  page  47  of 
this  volume,  he  tells  us  that  Fulk  de  Aneio  (de 
Alneto,  de  Aneto,  d'Anet,  for  it  is  spelt  all  manner  of 
ways)  was  the  son  of  Osmund  de  Centumville  (i.e. 
Cotenville)  by  a  niece  of  the  Duchess  Gonnor  or 
Gunnora,  and,  according  to  the  same  authority,  uncle 
of  a  Baldwin  de  Redvers.  Osmundo  de  Centumville 
was  Vicomte  de  Vcrnon,  and  a  Hugh  de  Redvers, 
also  called  Hugh  de  Vernon,  another  uncle  of  the 
same  Baldwin,  made  grants  to  Brumore  in  1089. 
That  members  of  the  latter  family  were  indiffer- 
ently called  De  Rivieres  and  De  Vernon  many 
proofs  could  be  adduced,  showing  that  they  were  of 
the  same  stock,  assuming  the  names  of  their  own  fiefs 
for  distinction,  as  in  the  instance  of  the  sons  of  Baudry 
le  Teuton,  to  the  great  confusion  of  the  genealogist 
and  mystification  of  the  readers  of  history. 

That  Vernon  was  the  general  name  of  the  descen- 
dants of  Osmund,  can,  I  think,  be  scarcely  doubted. 
William  de  Vernon  possessed  the  town  and  Castle  of 
Vernon  in  1052,  a  fief  which  had  been  held  by  Guy  of 
Burgundy,  on  whom,  in  his  youth,  Duke  William  had 
bestowed  it  together  with  Brionne,  but  who  lost  both 
by  his  defeat  at  Val-es-Dunes  in  1047.  Brionne,  we  see, 


FULK  D'AULNAY.  205 


was  given  to  Baldwin  de  Meules  on  the  marriage  of 

William  and  Matilda,  and  Vernon  probably  bestowed 

it  on  Osmund  de  Centumville  when  he  became  the 

husband  of  a  niece  of  the  fortunate  Gonnor,  Duchess  of 

Normandy.     William,  probably  his  son,  who  was  Sire 

de  Vernon  in  1052,  had  two  sons,  Walter  and  Eichard 

de  Vernon,  both  of  whom  are  stated  to  have  followed 

Duke  William  to  England.*   That  the  name  of  Vernon 

appears  in  the  Eoll  of  Battle,  in  the  list  printed  by 

Duchesne,  and  the  rhyming  one  of  Leland,  would  be 

no   corroboration    of  that    statement ;    but   there   is 

evidence  enough  that  Richard  de  Vernon  was  one  of 

the   barons   created   by  Hugh  d'Avranches,  Earl  of 

Chester,  by  the  title  of  Shipbroke,  and  a  holder  of  large 

estates  at  the  time  of  the  general  survey.     There  is 

consequently  proof  that,  if  not  actually  in  the  invading 

army,  he  was  a  distinguished  Norman  at  that  period, 

and  is  probably   the  Sire   de   Neahou   whom  Wace 

says  was  in  the  battle,  as  that  fief,  Neel's  Hou  or  Holm, 

in   the  arrondissement  of  Valognes,  passed  from  the 

Vicomtes  de  St-Sauveur  to  that  of  Reviers- Vernon, 

and  in  the  red  book  of  the  Exchequer  a  Richard  de 

Vernon  is  returned  as  holding  the  honour  of  Nehou 

by  the  service  of  ten  knights,  and  having  the  custody 

of  the  Castle  of  Vernon. 

*  The  French  catalogues  add  "  Huard  "  de  Vernon,  a  name  hitherto 
unknown. 


20G         THE  CONQUEROR  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

I  will  not  pretend  to  decide  upon  the  exact  relation- 
ship of  Fulk  d'Aulnay  to  William  de  Vernon,  but 
that  they  were  very  near  connections,  if  not  brothers, 
I  think  cannot  be  well  disputed. 

From  a  similarity  of  names,  Fulk  d'Aulnay  has 
been  confounded  constantly  with  Fulk  d'Aunou,  of 
whom  I  have  already  discoursed  (p.  132,  ante).  Even 
M.  le  Prevost  has  been  partially  misled  by  it. 

Beyond  his  presence  in  the  battle,  I  have  no 
information  to  give.  Genealogy  and  history  are  both 
silent  about  him  as  far  as  I  know.  The  name 
of  De  Alneto  is  of  frequent  occurrence  in  charters  of 
the  subsequent  century.  A  Berenger  d' Alneto  sub- 
scribes the  foundation  charter  of  the  Abbey  of  Aumale 
in  1115.  Hubert  de  Alneto  witnesses  two  charters  of 
Henry  I.,  and  Roger  de  Alneto  appears  to  be  a  relation 
of  Gundred  de  Gournay,  wife  of  Nigel  de  Albini ;  but 
no  link  is  discoverable  between  either  of  these  and 
Fulk.  Was  he  amongst  the  hundreds  of  unrecorded 
slain  ?  Did  he  fall  in  the  fight  for  the  standard,  or 
was  he  slaughtered  in  the  slough  of  the  Malefosse  ? 
A  Simon  d'Aneti  or  de  Aneio,  recorded  in  the  red  book 
aforesaid,  is  asserted  by  the  authors  of  the  "  Recherches 
sur  le  Domesday  "  to  be  the  recognized  descendant  of 
"  Foulques  d'Anet,"  but  they  have  not  favoured  us 
with  the  materials  for  such  recognition. 


BERNARD  DE  ST.   VALERI.  207 


I  have  said  so  much  about  the  Vernons  in  this 
notice  of  one  of  the  family  that  I  shall  not  appropriate 
a  separate  article  to  them,  as  I  could  only  repeat  my 
suggestion,  that  if  a  De  Vernon  was  present  at  Senlac, 
he  was  probably  alluded  to  by  Wace  as  the  Sire  de 
Nehou,  a  portion  of  which  fief  was  certainly  held  by 
Kichard  de  Vernon  when  Wace  wrote,  and  might  have 
been  held  by  him,  under  the  Viscount  of  Saint- 
Sa'uveur,  by  military  service  at  the  time  of  the  inva- 
sion, if  indeed  Nehou  was  restored  to  Neel  after  its 
forfeiture  in  1047,  at  which  period  it  was  probably 
given  to  Baldwin  de  Eedvers  who  has  been  so 
frequently  confounded  with  Baldwin  de  Meules,  as  I 
have  instanced  in  my  memoir  of  him  (page  40,  ante). 

BERNARD  DE  ST.  VALERI. 

Orderic  has  supplied  us  with  plenty  of  material 
for  a  memoir  of  the  family  of  St.  Valeri,  indifferently 
written  Waleri  and  Galeri,  so  many  of  which  were 
benefactors  to  his  beloved  Abbey  of  Ouche,  otherwise 
St.  Evroult,  and,  as  the  fleet  of  Duke  William  sailed 
from  the  port  of  St.  Valery-sur-Somme,  the  bourg  from 
which  they  took  their  name,  it  would  be  strange 
indeed  if  a  "  Sire  de  St.  Galeri "  had  not  been 
found  in  Wace's  catalogue  of  the  companions  of  the 
Conqueror. 


208         THE   CONQUEKOE  AND  HIS   COMPANIONS. 


They  did  not,  however,  hold  the  fief  of  St.  Valeri 
in  their  own  right,  but  as  hereditary  advocates  of  the 
abbey,  founded  there  by  Lothaire  in  613,  in  which  the 
lordship  was  vested.  To  the  devotion  of  the  Duke 
and  his  barons  to  its  patron  saint,  the  Merovingian 
Walleric,  and  the  solemn  procession  of  the  abbot  and 
monks  bearing  the  shrine  which  contained  his  holy 
relics,  was  attributed  the  favourable  change  of  the 
wind  for  which  William  had  so  long  waited. 

The  Sires  of  St.  Valeri  were  also  connected  by 
marriage  with  the  ducal  family,  and  could  claim 
cousinship  by  blood  with  the  Conqueror.  Gilbert, 
the  Advocate  of  St.  Valeri,  married  Papia,  daughter 
of  Richard  II.  Duke  of  Normandy,  by  his  wife,  "more 
Danico,"  of  that  name.  She  bore  to  him  two  sons,  Ber- 
nard and  Richard.  Of  Richard,  I  shall  speak  hereafter. 
It  is  with  his  elder  brother  that  we  have  first  to  deal, 
as  he  has  been  unhesitatingly  named  by  M.  le  Prevost 
as  the  "  Sire  de  Galeri "  of  the  Norman  poet,  though 
upon  what  authority  I  have  not  been  able  to  discover. 
Certainly  not  upon  that  of  Orderic,  who,  provok- 
ingly  enough,  while  most  liberal  in  his  information 
respecting  Richard  and  his  descendants,  tells  us 
nothing  about  Bernard  except  that  he  was  the  father 
of  Walter  de  St.  Valery,  who  wTas  probably  the  Walter 
of  Domesday,  possessing  at  the  time  of  its  compilation, 


BEEXAED   DE   ST.   VALERI.  209 


amongst  other  estates,  tlie  extensive  manor  of  Isle- 
worth,  in  the  county  of  Middlesex,  but  whether  as 
the  heir  of  his  father,  on  whom  they  might  have 
been  bestowed  by  the  Conqueror,  or  acquired  by 
himself,  either  as  a  reward  for  service  rendered  to 
his  sovereign  or  through  some  fortunate  marriage,  we 
are  left  to  conjecture. 

If  Bernard  was  really  the  companion  of  the  Con- 
queror at  Hastings  and  Senlac,  the  former  solution  of 
the  question  is  most  reasonable,  and  the  possession  of 
the  domains  by  his  son  Walter  has  probably  been  the 
chief  ground  for  Le  Frevost's  statement,  which  Mr. 
Taylor  copies  without  observation,  as  well  as  for  that 
of  MM.  de  Magny  and  Delisle.  Still  it  is  rather 
extraordinary  that  the  historian  of  the  family  should 
record  the  military  services,  the  marriages  and  issue  of 
Eichard  and  his  sons,  and  make  no  mention  of  so  in- 
teresting a  fact  as  the  presence  of  the  elder  brother 
Bernard  in  the  expedition  which  sailed  from  his  own 
port,  and  the  famous  victory  in  which  it  resulted. 

We  must  therefore  content  ourselves  perforce  with 
the  assurance  of  Wace,  that  the  Lord  of  St.  Valeri, 
tand  those  he  rode  with,  demeaned  themselves  like 
brave  men,  and  sorely  handled  all  whom  their  weapons 
could  reach.  We  hear  nothing  of  him  after  the  Con- 
quest, and  he  was  probably  dead  when  Walter  de 


210         THE  CONQUEROR  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

St.  Valery  was  found  seized  of  the  manor  of  Isle- 
worth.  The  latter  was  living  in  1097,  when,  with  his 
son  Bernard,  he  was  in  the  Holy  Land,  and  fought 
under  the  banners  of  Bohemond  in  the  great  battle  of 
Dorylaeum. 

But  Walter  de  St.  Valery  was  not  the  only  one  of 
the  name  who  held  lands  in  England  at  the  time  of  the 
survey. 

A  Eanulf  de  St.  Walerie  was  Lord  of  Randely, 
Stamtone,  Refan,  Stratone,  Burgrede,  and  Scotome,  in 
Lincolnshire,  but  how  related  to  Walter  does  not 
appear.  "  What  came  of  him  or  his  posterity,"  says 
Dugdale,  "  if  he  had  any,  I  know  not,  for  those  in  the 
succeeding  ages  had  not  any  lands  in  that  county." 
u  Those  "  being  the  issue  of  Reginald,  son  of  Guy  de 
St.  Valerie,  who  held  Hazeldine,  in  Gloucestershire,  of 
which  he  was  deprived  by  King  Stephen,  being  a 
partizan  of  Henry  Fitz  Empress,  but  recovered  it  again 
on  the  accession  of  the  latter,  and  who  was  one  of  the 
persons  sent  by  him  with  letters  to  the  King  of  France, 
requesting  him  not  to  give  any  reception  or  protection 
to  the  fugitive  Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  Thomas  a 
Becket. 

That  this  Reginald  was  .a  lineal  descendant  of  Ber- 
nard and  Walter  is  obvious  from  the  fact  that,  on  the 
death  of  his  grandson  Thomas,  in  1219  (3  Henry  III.), 


BEENAED  DE  ST.   VALEEI.  211 

all  his  hereditary  estates  passed  with  Annora,  sole 
child  of  Thomas,  to  her  first  husband,  Robert  Comte 
de  Dreux,  to  whom  at  the  same  time  she  brought  the 
manor  of  Isleworth,  which  Walter  held  in  the  reign  of 
the  Conqueror,  and  of  which  the  Comte  de  Dreux  was 
found  seized  in  right  of  his  wife  in  1220.* 

Let  us,  however,  before  leaving  this  subject,  hear 
what  Orderic  has  to  «ay  respecting  Richard  de  St. 
Valery  and  his  descendants.  This  second  son  of 
Gilbert  and  Papia  was  "  long  employed  in  the  military 
service  of  his  uncle,  Richard  Duke  of  Normandy,  from 
whom  he  received  in  marriage  Ada,  widow  of  the 
elder  Herleuin  de  Heugleville,  with  all  her  inheritance." 
Hence  it  appears  he  assumed,  according  to  custom, 
the  name  of  Heugleville,  and  built  a  town  at  a  place 
formerly  called  Isnelville,  on  the  river  Sie,  naming  it 
from  the  hill  which  rose  above  it  covered  with  beech 
trees,  Aufay  (Alfagium),  thus  acquiring  a  third  appella- 
tion as  the  Lord  of  Aufay.  He  was  distinguished  for 
his  military  abilities  and  his  great  liberality — -a  formid- 
•  able  foe  and  a  faithful  friend.  During  the  minority 
of  Duke  William,  when  William  of  Arques  revolted 
against  him,  and  he  was  deserted  by  nearly  all  the 
Lords  of  Talou,  Richard  alone  held  his  castle  near  the 

*  Annora  married  secondly  Henry  de  Sullie,  but  had  no  issue  by 
either  husband.  Orderic  makes  no  mention  of  Eanulf,  Guy,  or  Eegi- 
nald  in  his  account  of  the  family. 

P  2 


212         THE   CONQUEEOR  AND   HIS  COMPANIONS. 


Church  of  St.  Aubin  against  the  rebels,  and  exerted 
himself  to  defend  the  loyal  inhabitants  of  the  country 
from  the  inroads  of  the  garrison  of  Arques. 

Now  this  Richard  de  Heugleville,  Lord  of  Aufay, 
had  a  son  named,  as  usual  after  his  grandfather, 
Gilbert,  who  married  Beatrice,  daughter  of  Christian 
de  Valenciennes,  "an  illustrious  captain."  This  lady, 
Orderic  tells  us,  was  a  cousin  of  Queen  Matilda,  and 
bore  to  her  husband  two  sons  and  one  daughter. 
Gilbert  d'Aufay,  as  he  was  called  from  his  patrimonial 
estates,  was  also,  by  his  grandmother  Papia,  a  kinsman 
of  Duke  William,  and  the  same  author  affirms  that "  he 
fought  by  the  Duke's  side  at  the  head  of  his  vassals 
in  all  the  principal  actions  during  the  English  War." 

That  he  included  the  most  important  of  all  is,  I 
think,  evident  from  the  passage  which  follows  : — "But 
when  William  became  King,  and  peace  was  established, 
Gilbert  returned  to  Normandy,  notwithstanding  Wil- 
liam offered  him  ample  domains  in  England,  for  with 
innate  honesty  of  character  he  refused  to  participate  in 
the  fruits  of  rapine.  Content  with  his  patrimonial 
estates,  he  declined  those  of  others,  and  piously  devoted 
his  son  Hugh  to  a  monastic  life  under  Abbot  Mainer, 
in  the  Abbey  of  St.  Evroult," 

The  name  of  St.  Valery  is  only  to  be  found  in 
Brompton  and  the  modern  lists,  and  that  of  Aufay  no- 


ROBERT  D'OILEY.  213 

where.  In  deference  to  M.  le  Prevost,  who  may  have 
had  grounds  for  his  opinion  which  he  has  omitted  to 
cite,  I  have  headed  this  memoir  with  the  name  of 
Bernard  as  the  "  Sire  de  St.  Galeri "  mentioned  by 
Wace  ;  but  it  is  quite  possible  that  the  Lord  of  Aufay 
may  have  been  designated  by  his  original  patronymic, 
and  he  is  the  only  member  of  the  family  of  St.  Valery 
who  appears  indubitably  to  have  been  a  companion  of 
the  Conqueror. 

ROBERT  D'OILEY. 

There  may  be,  it  seems,  a  question  whether  by 
"d'Oillie"  (Rom.  de  Rou,  1.  13,659)  the  author  means 
one  of  the  many  u  Ouillies  "  to  be  found  in  the  arron- 
dissement  of  Falaise,  or  Ailly,  near  Centibo3uf ;  but 
whatever  doubt  there  may  be  respecting  the  locality 
from  which  this  valiant  Norman  derived  his  name, 
there  is  none  as  to  his  having  been  at  Senlac,  and 
rewarded  for  his  services  there  with  the  baronies  of 
Oxford  and  St.  Waleries  in  England.  He  is  simply 
mentioned  as  "  cil  d'Oillie  "  by  Wace  amongst  some 
dozen  of  doughty  knights,  to  whom  no  particular  feat 
of  arms  is  accorded;  and  unless  we  are  to  consider 
"  Duylly  "  in  Leland's  alliterative  list  is  intended  for  it, 
the  name  occurs  in  no  catalogue  of  those  who  came  in 
with  the  Conqueror — one  of  the  many  proofs  of  the 
little  dependence  that  can  be  placed  on  any. 


214         THE  CONQUEEOE  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

Eobert  d'Oiley  built  the  Castle  of  Oxford,  and  the 
collegiate  church  of  St.  John  within  the  walls.  He 
was  also  one  of  the  witnesses  to  the  foundation  charter 
of  the  Abbey  of  Selby  by  King  William,  and  at  the 
time  of  the  general  survey  possessed  four  lordships 
in  Berkshire,  fourteen  in  Herefordshire,  seven  in 
Buckinghamshire,  three  in  Gloucestershire,  and  three 
in  Northamptonshire,  one  in  Bedfordshire,  one  in 
Warwickshire,  and  twenty-eight  in  Oxfordshire,  in 
all  sixty-one  manors ;  besides  forty-two  habitable 
houses  in  Oxford,  and  eight  which  then  lay  waste, 
with  thirty  acres  of  meadow  land  adjoining  the  wall, 
and  a  mill  valued  at  ten  shillings  per  annum  of  the 
money  of  that  time.  Being  likewise  Constable  of 
Oxford,  he  had  the  full  sway  of  the  whole  county,  and 
was  so  powerful  a  baron  that  no  one  durst  oppose  him. 

With  the  King's  consent  he  took  possession  of  a 
large  meadow  near  the  Castle  of  Oxford  which 
belonged  to  the  monks  of  Abingdon,  who,  being  sorely 
aggrieved  by  this  act,  came  in  a  body  before  the  altar 
of  our  Lady,  and  prostrating  themselves,  prayed  with 
tears  to  God  that  He  would  avenge  the  injury.  Where- 
upon, says  Dugdale,  it  shortly  after  happened  that 
D'Oiley  fell  into  a  grievous  sickness,  but  continued  im- 
penitent until  one  night  he  dreamed  that  he  was  in  a 
royal  palace,  where,  amongst  many  nobles  standing 


EOBEET  D'OILEY.  215 

about  it,  was  a  glorious  throne,  on  which  sat  a 
beautiful  person  habited  like  a  woman,  and  before  her 
knelt  two  monks  of  Abingdon  whom  he  knew,  and 
who,  when  they  saw  him  enter  the  palace,  said  with 
deep  sighs  to  the  Lady,  "  Behold  this  is  he  who 
usurpeth  the  inheritance  of  thy  church,  having  taken 
away  that  meadow  from  us  for  which  we  make  this 
complaint/'  The  Lady,  much  moved,  commanded 
that  he  should  be  thrust  out  of  doors  and  taken  to 
that  meadow,  there  to  be  tormented.  Two  young 
men  who  stood  near  immediately  seized  and  led  him 
to  the  meadow,  where  they  made  him  sit  down,  and 
he  was  forthwith  surrounded  by  divers  ugly  children 
with  loads  of  hay  upon  their  shoulders,  who  laughingly 
said  to  each  other,  "Here  is  our  friend,  let  us  play 
with  him !  "  Upon  which,  setting  fire  to  the  hay, 
they  smoked  and  burned  him  till  in  his  anguish  he 
called  out  aloud,  "  0  blessed  Lady !  have  pity  upon 
me,  for  I  am  dying ! "  His  wife,  much  alarmed, 
exclaimed,  "  Awake,  sir,  for  you  are  much  troubled  in 
your  sleep,"  and  being  thus  aroused,  he  answered, 
"  Yes,  truly,  for  I  was  amongst  devils  ! "  "  The  Lord 
preserve  thee  from  all  harm ! "  ejaculated  his  pious 
and  affectionate  helpmate,  and  on  hearing  his  dream, 
consoled  him  with  the  text,  "  Whom  the  Lord  loveth 
he  chasteneth." 


216         THE  CONQTJEROR  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 


At  her  instance,  to  quiet  his  conscience,  he  shortly 
afterwards  repaired  to  Abingdon,  and  there,  before  the 
altar,  in  presence  of  Abbot  Reginald  and  the  whole 
convent,  as  well  as  of  many  personal  friends,  he  gave 
to  the  community  the  lordship  of  Cadmerton,  value 
ten  pounds  per  annum,  solemnly  protesting  that  he 
would  never  meddle  more  with  any  of  their  posses- 
sions. He  also  presented  them  with  more  than  a 
hundred  pounds  in  money  towards  the  reconstruction 
of  their  monastery,  in  atonement  for  the  wrong  he  had 
done  them.  Moreover,  he  amended  his  ways  for  the 
rest  of  his  life,  repairing  divers  churches  both  within 
and  without  the  walls  of  Oxford,  becoming  very 
charitable  to  the  poor,  and  amongst  other  good  works 
building  the  great  bridge  there. 

I  have  told  this  silly  story  (omitting  some  little 
coarseness),  as  I  have  told  others  of  the  same  nature 
in  the  course  of  this  work,  in  illustration  of  the 
childish  superstition  by  which  men  of  the  most  un- 
daunted courage — fierce,  proud  and  powerful  men — 
were  weak  enough  to  be  enslaved.  Some  of  these 
tales  were  doubtless  subsequent  inventions  by  the 
monks  themselves,  while  others  are  veritable  descrip- 
tions of  "pious  frauds"  practised  by  them  on  the 
sick  or  the  dying,  for  the  purpose  of  augmenting  their 
funds  or  increasing  their  influence.  At  the  same  time 


HOBELT  D'OILEY.  217 


it  is  singular  to  observe  the  simple  good  faith  with 
which  truly  religious  and  honest  writers,  such  as 
Orderic,  testify  to  the  veracity  of  the  most  prepos- 
terous narrations  on  the  grounds  of  their  having  heard 
them  from  the  very  lips  of  the  persons  who  have  been 
favoured  with  such  miraculous  manifestations. 

However  unworthy  of  credit  they  may  generally  be, 
there  are  few  that  do  not  afford  us  peeps  into  past 
manners  and  customs,  pictures  of  the  inner  life  of  our 
ancestors,  and  incidental  information  on  a  variety  of 
subjects  formerly  considered  beneath  the  notice  of  the 
historian,  but  of  which  the  value  has  within  the  last 
fifty  years  been  discovered  and  acknowledged  by  the 
most  eminent  authors  of  France,  England,  and  Ger- 
many. One  of  the  results  recorded  by  the  monks  of 
Abingdon  of  the  dream  of  Robert  d'Oiley — if  ever  he 
had  such  a  dream — was  the  building  of  the  first  great 
bridge  at  Oxford ;  the  earliest  information  we  possess 
upon  the  subject,  and  which  may  be  depended  upon, 
whatever  doubt  may  be  entertained  of  the  veracity  of 
the  vision. 

The  exemplary  wife  of  Robert  d'Oiley  was  the 
daughter  and  apparently  heir  of  "Wygod  of  \Yalling- 
ford,  "  a  person  of  great  note  in  that  age,"  by  whom 
he  had  an  only  daughter  named  Maud,  the  wife  first 
of  Milo  Crispin,  and  secondly  of  Brien  Fitz  Count,  to 


218         THE  CONQUEEOE  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

Avhom  she  brought  the  whole  barony  of  Wallingford, 
but  having  no  issue,  both  she  and  Brien  betook  them- 
selves to  a  religious  life,  whereupon  King  Henry  I. 
seized  Wallingford  and  appropriated  it  to  his  own 
uses. 

Robert  d'Oiley  leaving  no  male  issue  was  succeeded 
\)y  his  brother  Nigel,  whose  son  and  successor,  Robert, 
married  the  beautiful  Edith  Forne,  mistress  of  Henry  I., 
and  by  that  king  mother  of  Robert,  Earl  of  Gloucester. 
There  is  a  little  bit  of  mediaeval  gossip  about  this  lad}', 
which  professes  to  account  for  the  foundation  of  the 
Abbey  of  Oseney,  near  Oxford.  The  fair  but  frail 
Edith,  having  become  the  lawful  wife  of  the  said 
Robert  d'Oiley,  was  in  the  frequent  habit  of  strolling 
down  from  the  castle  to  the  banks  of  the  Isis.  The 
pleasure  she  derived  from  this  innocent  and  healthful 
recreation  was,  however,  considerably  interfered  with 
by  the  conduct  of  a  colony  of  "  chattcrpies,"  who  had 
established  themselves  in  a  clump  of  trees  by  the  side 
of  the  river,  arid  invariably  on  her  appearance  com- 
menced a  most  impertinent  clamour,  which  it  was 
impossible  to  mistake  for  flattery.  Humiliated  as 
well  as  irritated  by  this  almost  daily  insult,  she  sent 
for  a  canon  of  St.  Fridiswides  in  Oxford,  named 
Randolph,  a  person  of  virtuous  life,  and  her  own  con- 
fessor, and  requested  his  advice  on  the  matter.  Of 


EOBEET  D'OILEY. 


course  lie  suggested  that  the  only  mode  of  escaping 
the  malicious  mockery  of  the  magpies  was  to  clear 
away  the  trees  and  build  some  religious  house  upon 
the  spot,  which  she  immediately  entreated  her  husband 
to  do,  who  kindly  consented,  and  thereupon  erected 
and  founded  the  Abbey  of  Oseney  for  black  canons  of 
the  order  of  St.  Augustin,  and,  with  the  consent  of  his 
two  sons,  Henry  and  Gilbert,  richly  endowed  it  with 
lands  and  other  property,  constituting  Randolph  (no 
doubt  to  his  great  surprise)  the  first  prior. 

Margery,  the  elder  of  Robert's  two  granddaughters, 
co-heirs  of  their  brother  Henry,  the  last  male  of  the 
D'Oileys,  married  Henry  de  Beaumont,  Earl  of  War- 
wick, and  has  generally  been  accredited  as  the  mother 
of  his  heir,  Thomas  Earl  of  "Warwick,  and  conse- 
quently ancestress  of  the  Marshals  and  De  Plessites. 
By  a  writ  of  "  Novel  disseisin/'  llth  of  Henry  III.,  I 
am  inclined  to  believe  Thomas  was  the  son  of 
Philippa,  the  second  wife  of  Henry  de  Beaumont,  who 
was  daughter  of  Thomas,  Lord  Basset  of  Heddington, 
and  has  been  hitherto  said  to  have  died  without 
issue.  Many  erroneous  descents  have  been  recorded 
in  these  early  pedigrees  through  the  neglect  of  accu- 
rately ascertaining,  in  cases  where  a  man  has  married 
two  or  more  Avives,  which  lady  was  the  mother  of  his 
heir.  In  the  instance  of  Adeliza,  sister  of  the  Con- 


220         THE  CONQUEEOE  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

queror,  we  have  seen  her  issue  by  each  husband  most 
perplexingly  confounded. 

JEAN  D'lVEI. 

I  shall  conclude  this  chapter  with  a  few  lines  con- 
taining all  I  have  hitherto  discovered  respecting  this 
personage,  who  is  only  known  as  the  sworn  brother- 
in-arms  of  Kobert  d'Oiley,  and  who  appears  to  be 
equally  entitled  with  him  to  claim  companionship 
with  the  Conqueror,  yet  I  do  not  find  his  name  in  any 
roll  or  catalogue,  nor  can  I  detect  him  amongst  the 
many  unidentified  leaders  mentioned  by  Wace.  That 
he  is  not  a  myth,  however,  is  clear  from  the  fact  of 
his  having  received  from  Robert  d'Oiley  a  large 
share  of  the  spoil,  and  specially  the  honor  of  St. 
Waleries  ;  but  whether  he  married  or  left  issue  does 
not  appear.  His  patronymic  would  point  to  a  descent 
from  Ralph,  Comte  d'lvri,  or  Yvery  (latinized  Ibreio 
and  Iberico),  half-brother  of  Richard  I.,  being  the  son 
of  Sprote,  mistress  of  William  Longsword,  Duke  of 
Normandy,  by  Asperleng,  the  wealthy  Miller  of 
Yaudreuil,  whom  she  married  after  the  death  of  the 
Duke. 

Aubree  or  Alberade,  wife  of  Count  Ralph,  built  the 
famous  Castle  of  Ivri.  The  architect  was  Larifred, 
whoso  reputation  transcended  that  of  all  the  masters 


JEAN  DTVEI.  '      221 


of  his  craft  at  that  period.  Having,  with  vast  labour 
and  expense,  constructed  a  fortress  unequalled  in 
Normandy,  the  bright  idea  occurred  to  the  lady  that 
it  should  so  [remain  as  far  as  Lanfred  was  concerned. 
In  order,  therefore,  that  his  skill  should  not  be  exer- 
cised by  an  endeavour  to  surpass  himself  for  the 
benefit  of  some  other,  perhaps  hostile  employer,  she 
prudently  had  his  head  cut  off  as  soon  as  his  work 
was  completed.  The  lady  eventually  suffered  the 
same  fate  at  the  hands  of  Count  Ralph,  her  husband, 
who,  though  he  seems  to  have  connived  at  her  murder 
of  the  architect,  considered  her  attempt  to  expel  him 
from  his  own  castle  was  an  offence  amounting  to  no 
less  than  treason,  and  made  her  pay  the  penalty  of 
such  high  crime  and  misdemeanour. 

She  had  borne  to  him  two  sons,  Hugh,  Bishop  of 
Bayeux,  and  John,  Bishop  of  Avranches  and  after- 
wards Archbishop  of  Rouen.  The  name  of  John 
indicates  some  family  connection  between  the  Arch- 
bishop and  the  friend  of  Robert  d'Oiley.  There  was 
also  a  Roger  d'lvri,  who  was  cupbearer  to  King 
AVilliam  the  Conqueror,  and  married  Adeline,  one  of 
the  daughters  of  Hugh  de  Grentmesnil,  the  founder 
of  the  Abbey  of  Ivri  in  1071,  and  was  probably  the 
brother  of  John  I.  The  father  of  Roger  was  Walernn 
d'lvri,  who  held  one  knight's  fee  in  the  bailiwick  of 


222         THE  CONQUEROR  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

Tencliebrai,  in  Normandy,  by  service  of  cupbearer 
to  the  Duke,  so  that  the  office  appears  to  have  been 
hereditary  in  the  family  ;  also  eight  and  a  half  knights' 
fees  in  the  town  and  castle  of  Ivri.  They  were  not 
lords  of  Ivri,  but  apparently  hereditary  castellans  of 
the  fortress  until  the  close  of  the  eleventh  century. 

According  to  tradition,  Count  Ralph  had  Ivri  given 
to  him  by  Duke  Richard,  his  uterine  brother,  in  conse- 
quence of  his  slaying  a  monstrous  bear  when  they 
were  out  hunting  together.  The  fief  appears  to  have 
passed  from  Ralph  to  Fitz  Osbern,  and  in  the  second 
year  of  the  reign  of  Rufus  was  in  the  possession  of 
William  de  Breteuil. 

Ascelin  Goel  de  Percival,  son  of  Robert  d'lvri,  Lord 
of  Breval,  took  the  Castle  of  Ivri  by  surprise  and 
delivered  it  to  Robert  Court-heuse.  De  Breteuil,  un- 
willing to  lose  it,  redeemed  it  from  the  Duke  for  fifteen 
hundred  livres.  Having  recovered  his  castle,  to  punish 
Goel  he  deprived  him  of  the  hereditary  right  to  its 
custody,  and  of  everything  he  held  in  his  lordship. 
The  fierce  Lord  of  Breval  avenged  himself  by  laying 
waste  the  whole  neighbourhood.  Aumari  de  Montfort, 
called  Le  Fort,  having  fallen  in  an  inroad  he  was 
making  on  the  lands  of  William  de  Breteuil,  Richard, 
his  brother,  devoted  himself  to  avenge  his  death,  and 
joining  his  forces  with  those  of  Ascelin  Goel,  they 


JEAN  D'lVEI.  223 


attacked  and  defeated  De  Breteuil  in  a  pitched  battle, 
taking  him  prisoner,  and  consigning  him  to  a  noisome 
dungeon,  in  which  he  lingered  until  Richard  de  Mont- 
fort  relenting,  succeeded,  with  the  assistance  of  Hugh 
de  Montgomeri,  Earl  of  Shrewsbury,  Gervase  de 
Neuchatel,  and  many  others,  in  making  peace  between 
Ascelin  Goel  and  his  feudal  lord  and  prisoner.  Ac- 
cording to  the  terms  of  the  treaty  concluded  at  Breval, 
William  de  Breteuil  gave  his  illegitimate  daughter 
Isabel  in  marriage  to  Goel,  and  ransomed  himself  at 
the  expense  of  a  thousand  livres  of  Dreux,  besides 
horses,  arms,  and  other  property.  With  great  sorrow 
he  added  also  the  impregnable  Castle  of  Ivri.  "  The 
infamous  freebooter,"  as  Orderic  calls  Goel,  "  thus 
enriched,  grew  intolerably  insolent,  and  enclosed  his 
castle,*  which  was  indeed  a  very  den  of  thieves,  with 
deep  ditches  and  stout  palisades,  passing  his  life 
there  in  continued  rapine  and  bloodshed.  He  had 
seven  sons  by  his  wife  Isabel,  who,  as  they  grew  in 
years,  increased  in  wickedness,  so  that  the  cries  of  the 
widow  and  the  destitute  followed  their  evil  deeds." 
Of  these  seven  very  bad  men  only  three  are  known, 
Robert,  lord  of  Ivri,  Roger  le  Begue,  and  William  Louvel 
(Lupellus,  the  little  Wolf),  ancestors  of  the  Levels  of 

*  Breval,  I  presume,  for  Ivri  was  in  no  need  of  further  defences. 
It  was,  as  we  have  seen,  a  model  fortress. 


224         THE  CONQUEKOE  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 


Tichmarsh,  the  Lords  Lovel  of  Kary,  and  the  Percivals, 
Earls  of  Egmont.  The  introduction,  therefore,  of  the 
name  of  Lovel  in  the  Roll  of  Battle  Abbey,  Brompton's 
List,  and  the  second  list  in  Leland  is  completely  un- 
justifiable, as  William  the  son  of  Ascelin  Goel,  on 
whom  it  was  first  bestowed,  could  not  have  been  born 
for  at  least  thirty  years  after  the  Conquest.  The 
same  observation  applies  to  that  of  Percival,  unless 
a  Sire  de  Percival  can  be  found  earlier  than  Ascelin 
Goel. 


CHAPTER   IX. 


EAOUL  DE  FOUGERES. 
ERRAND  DE  HARCOURT. 
WILLIAM  PAINEL. 
WALTER  D'AINCOURT. 


SAMSON  D  ANSNEV1LLE. 
HAMO  DE  CREVECCEUR. 
PICOT  DE  SAY. 


EAOUL  DE  FOUGERES. 

"  HE  of  Felgieres,"  says  Wace,  "  also  won  great 
renown  with  many  very  brave  men  he  brought  from. 
Brittany."  The  absence  of  the  baptismal  name,  as  in 
so  many  other  instances,  is  a  serious  obstacle  to  satis- 
factory identification. 

A  Ralph  and  a  William  de  Fougeres  (de  Filgeriis, 
as  it  is  latinized)  are  found  tenants  in  Domesday, 
but  we  have  no  evidence  to  show  that  the  Ralph 
therein  returned  was  the  Raoul  presumed  to  have 
been  "Oil  de  Felgieres,"  as  Wace  writes  it,  alluded 
to  in  the  above  passage  ("  Rom.  de  Rou,"  1.  13,496). 
Meen  or  Main  II.  was  Baron  of  Fougeres  in  Brit- 
tany at  the  time  of  the  Conquest,  and  not  too  old 
to  have  been  himself  in  the  expedition,  being  about 
the  age  of  the  Conqueror,  having  succeeded  his  father 


VOL.  II. 


226         THE  CONQUEEOE  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

Alfred  I.  in  1048,  and  surviving  the  invasion  of 
England  some  sixteen  or  seventeen  years.  By  his 
wife  Adelaide  he  had  three  sons — Juthael,  Elides  or 
Odo,  and  Raoul.  The  two  former  died  in  his  life- 
time without  issue,  and  he  was  therefore  succeeded  by 
his  younger  son  Raoul,  circa  1084.  So  says  Dom. 
Morice,  in  his  "Histoire  de  Bretagne,"  and  M.  de 
Pommereul,  who  follows  him  in  his  History  of  the 
Barons  of  Fougeres  ("1'Art  de  Verifier  les  Dates," 
vol.  xiii.  p.  270,  edit.  1818).  This  would  be  fairly 
borne  out  by  the  date  of  Domesday,  at  which  a  Raoul 
is  stated  to  hold  certain  lands  in  Surrey,  Devonshire, 
Buckinghamshire,  Norfolk,  and  Suffolk. 

But  then  who  was  "William  ?  The  first  William  de 
Fougeres  that  I  can  find  mention  of  was  one  of  the 
seven  children  of  Raoul  by  Avoyse  or  Avicia, 
daughter  of  Richard  de  Bienfaite,  and  as  he  was 
certainly  not  the  eldest  son,  Raoul  being  succeeded 
first  by  Meen  III.,  who  died  without  issue,  and  he  by 
Henri  I.,  the  next  brother,  in  1137,  "William,  their 
younger  brother,  could  surely  not  be  of  sufficient  age 
to  hold  lands  in  England  in  1085.  There  must  be 
either  some  great  confusion  of  dates  or  there  was  a 
"William  de  Fougeres  unknown  to  Morice  or  his 
copyist.  The  account  of  Raoul  is  very  vague. 

Long  before  he  succeeded  his  father  we  are  told 


KAOUL  DE  FOUGEEES.  227 

he  had  given  proofs  of  his  valour,  by  following  William 
Duke  of  Normandy  to  the  conquest  of  England.  By 
that  prince  he  was  put  in  possession  of  large  terri- 
tories, out  of  which  he  made  various  donations  to  the 
Abbey  of  Kisle  and  to  that  of  Savigny,  which  he 
founded  in  1112.  He  confirmed  the  foundation  of 
the  Priory  of  the  Holy  Trinity  by  his  mother,  Ade- 
laide, and  gave  it,  as  well  as  the  Church  of  Saint 
Sulpice  at  Fougeres,  to  the  Abbey  of  Marmoutier. 
Subsequently  he  travelled  to  Eome,  and  passing  by 
Marmoutier,  confirmed  all  his  previous  gifts  to  it. 
He  died  in  1124,  leaving  by  his  wife  aforesaid  seven 
children — Meen,  Henri,  Gauthier,  "Robert,  Guillaume, 
Avelon,  and  Beatrice. 

Now  if  these  dates  can  be  depended  on,  and  they 
are  not  materially  affected  by  any  test  I  have  been 
able  to  apply  to  them,  it  is  not  surprising  that  Le 
PreVost  should  doubt  the  presence  of  Eaoul  at  Hast- 
ings, between  which  event  and  that  of  his  death  there 
would  elapse  fifty-eight  years.  Still,  allowing  him  to 
have  been  a  young  man  of  two-and-twenty  in  1066, 
he  would  have  been  only  eighty  in  1124 — not  an 
improbable  age  for  him  to  have  attained,  and  we  have 
no  evidence  to  show  that  he  did  not  do  so.  Unless  we 
could  prove  that  he  was  too  young  to  fight  at  Senlac  in 

1066,  the  benefit  of  the  doubt  must  be  accorded  to  him. 

Q  2 


228         THE  CONQUEEOE  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

He  was  therefore,  we  may  conclude,  the  companion 
of  the  Conqueror  and  the  tenant  in  Domesday  :  but 
this  does  not  advance  us  a  step  in  our  knowledge  of 
the  William  de  Fougeres  in  the  same  record.  He 
must  have  been  born  before  1066  to  have  held  land  in 
capite  in  1085,  and  as  "William,  the  son  of  Eaoul  and 
Avicia,  had  certainly  two  if  not  four  elder  brothers, 
not  counting  the  sisters  whose  births  might  have  inter- 
vened, we  must  date  the  marriage  of  Eaoul  as  far  back 
as  1060  at  least,  which  would  make  a  serious  addition 
to  the  venerable  age  I  have  already  accorded  to 
him. 

We  have  two  later  Williams,  who  of  course  are 
quite  out  of  the  question,  but  whom  I  must  mention, 
in  order  to  correct  a  serious  error  in  "  1'Art  de  Verifier 
les  Dates,"  which  its  authors  have  been  led  into  by 
Morice,  tending  to  create  the  greatest  confusion. 

Henri  Baron  of  Fougeres,  second  son  of  Eaoul  L, 
and  brother  of  Meen,  whom  he  succeeded,  had,  by  his 
wife,  Olive  de  Bretagne,  three  sons — Eaoul,  Frangal, 
and  Guillaume.  Eaoul,  the  eldest,  succeeded  his  father 
as  Eaoul  II.  The  above  writers  give  him  two  wives, 
and  make  him  father,  without  distinguishing  the 
mothers,  of  four  sons — Geoffrey,  Juhel,  Guillaume, 
and  Henri — the  eldest  of  whom,  they  say,  succeeded 
him.  Mr.  Stapleton  has  clearly  shown  that  Geoffrey 


EEEAND  DE  HAECOUET.      .  229 

was  not  the  son,  but  the  grandson  of  Raoul  II.,  being 
the  only  son  of  Guillaume  (William)  de  Fougeres, 
who  died  in  his  father's  lifetime,  7th  June,  1187, 
leaving  issue  this  Geoffrey,  a  minor  at  his  grand- 
father's death  in  1194,  and  inward  to  his  great-uncle, 
Guillaume,  and  an  only  daughter,  Clemencia,  married 
first  to  Alain  de  Dinant,  and  secondly,  to  Ranulph 
Blondeville,  Earl  of  Chester. 

There  are  many  other  inaccuracies  involved  with 
this  in  the  account  of  Raoul  and  his  family,  but  with 
them  I  have  no  business  here.  The  important  one 
affecting  the  pedigree  of  the  Earls  of  Chester  I  could 
not  pass  without  notice.  The  seal  of  William  de 
Fougeres  (Cotton.  Charters,  52  A,  15)  affords  us  an 
interesting  example  of  "  armes  parlantes."  The 
shield  is  simply  charged  with  branches  of  fern 
(fougere). 

EEEAND  DE  HAECOUET. 

"  The  Sire  de  Herecourt  was  also  there  riding  a  very 
swift  horse,  and  gave  the  Duke  all  the  aid  he  could." 
Rom.  de  Rou,  1.  13,769.  La  Koque,  the  French  his- 
torian of  the  house  of  Harcourt,  names  the  member  of 
that  family  who  accompanied  William  to  England, 
Errand,  and  he  has  been  followed  by  Pere  Anselm 
and  other  genealogists.  Le  Prevost  views  him  sus- 


230         THE  CONQUEKOfi,  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

piciously,  and  calls  him  a  person  little  known,  and 
much  less  authentic,  than  his  father,  Anchetil,  or  his 
brother  Robert,  the  first  Sire  d'Harcourt  of  that  name. 
I  do  not  participate  in  these  suspicions.  I  believe  him 
to  have  been  a  veritable  companion  of  the  Conqueror, 
and  shall  adduce  my  reasons  presently  for  taking  a 
particular  interest  in  him. 

The  family  of  Harcourt,  illustrious  on  both  sides  of 
the  Channel,  is  fairly  enough  shown  by  La  Roque  to 
have  descended  from  Bernard  the  Dane,  Governor 
and  Regent  of  Normandy,  A.D.  912,  and  from  the  same 
stock  he  derives  the  Sires  de  Beaumout,  Comtes  de 
Meulent,  the  Barons  of  Cancelles  and  St.  Paer,  the  Lords 
of  Gournay  and  Milly,  the  Barons  of  Neubourg,  the 
Viscounts  of  Evreux,  the  Earls  of  Leicester  and  War- 
wick, and  many  other  French  and  English  noble 
houses. 

Turketil,  Seigneur  de  Turqueville  and  de  Tanqueraye, 
named  circa  1001  in  several  charters  concerning 
the  Abbeys  of  Fe'camp  and  Bernay,  is  identical 
according  to  La  Roque  with  the  Thurkild  or  Thorold, 
Lord  of  Neufmarche-eu-Lions,  the  governor  of  the  boy- 
Duke  William,  who  was  treacherously  assassinated  by 
the  hirelings  of  Raoul  de  Gace  (vide  vol.  i.,  p.  16),  and 
was  the  second  son  of  Torf,  the  son  of  Bernard.  The 
wife  of  Turketil  was  Anceline,  sister  of  Toustain, 


EEEAND  DE  HAECOURT.  231 

Seigneur  de  Montfort-sur-Risle,  and  their  issue  two 
sons,  Anchetil  and  Walter,  and  one  daughter,  Leceline 
de  Turqueville,  who  married  "William,  Comte  d'Eu,  the 
natural  son  of  Richard  L,  Duke  of  Normandy. 

Anchetil,  the  eldest  son,  was  the  first  who  assumed 
the  name  of  Harcourt,  from  the  bourg  of  Harcourt 
near  Brionne,  and  was  present  with  his  father, 
Turketil,  at  the  confirmation  of  the  foundation  of  the 
Abbey  of  Bernay,  by  Judith,  Duchess  of  Normandy, 
in  1014.  By  Eve  de  Boessey,  Dame  de  Boessey-le- 
Chapel,  he  had  seven  sons  and  one  daughter,  the  eldest 
son  being  the  Errand  de  Harcourt  asserted  to  have 
been  the  companion  of  the  Conqueror. 

We  have  no  dates  of  births,  marriages,  or  any  other 
events  which  would  assist  us  to  form  an  idea  of  the 
age  of  Errand  at  the  time  of  the  Conquest.  His 
father  Anchetil  must  have  been  a  mere  child  when  he 
witnessed  with  his  father  the  confirmation  charter  of 
Bernay. 

His  father  was  murdered  shortly  after  1035,  and 
Anchetil  must  therefore  have  been  of  mature  age  in 
1066.  Still,  according  to  the  genealogy,  he  survived 
his  eldest  son,  and  wTas  succeeded  by  his  second  son 
Robert,  who  was  living  in  1100,  and  father  of  Philip 
Harcourt,  Bishop  of  Salisbury,  1140. 

From  Robert  all  is  clear,  but  it  is  with  his  eldest 


232         THE  CONQUEBOB  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

brother  Errand  and  his  younger  ones  that  we  have  to 
do.  Why  Errand  should  have  been  selected  as  the 
Sire  d'Harcourt  who  fought  at  Senlac,  if  Robert  had 
really  been  the  man,  is  incomprehensible.  The  vice  of 
ancient  genealogists  was  the  endeavour  to  exalt  the 
character  and  exaggerate  the  valorous  achievements 
of  the  ancestors  of  the  family,  to  the  extent  even  of 
inventing  stories  to  account  for  armorial  devices  which 
they  could  not  comprehend,  or  sobriquets  they  took 
no  trouble  to  trace  to  their  origin.  Had  Robert,  who 
was  Sire  d'Harcourt  when  Wace  wrote,  been  present  in 
the  battle,  some  tradition  would  surely  have  been  pre- 
served in  the  family  and  eagerly  recorded  by  its 
historian. 

That  Errand  "  is  little  known "  is  no  reason  for 
doubting  his  presence  at  Hastings.  How  many  were 
there  of  whom  we  know  nothing  at  all  ?  How  many, 
I  grieve  to  say,  are  named  even  in  these  pages  of 
whom  we  know  next  to  nothing  ?  That  he  should  be 
less  known  than  his  father  and  brother  is  not  at  all 
surprising,  as  it  is  evident  from  the  fact  of  Robert's, 
succession  that  Errand  died  during  his  father's  life- 
time, leaving  no  male  issue  by  his  wife,  who  was  of 
the  family  of  Estouteville. 

Jean  le  Feron  informs  us  that  he  returned  to  Nor- 
mandy in  1078,  and  probably  died  soon  after,  as  from 


EEEAND  DE  HARCOURT.  23? 

that  period  we  hear  no  more  of  him.  But  I  must 
have  yet  another  word  with  M.  le  Pre'vost.  He 
accuses  the  English  genealogists  of  having  fabricated 
an  apocryphal  affiliation  in  order  to  show  that  the 
English  branch  of  the  Harcourts  came  in  with  the 
Conqueror,  and  for  this  purpose  have  created  a 
Gervase,  a  Geoffrey,  and  an  Arnold  de  Harcourt, 
whom  they  pretend  were  all  three  present  in  the  battle 
of  Hastings ;  and  he  adds,  that  according  to  La 
Roque  it  was  Raoul,  second  son  of  Robert  II.,  Baron 
de  Harcourt,  who  being  attached  to  King  John,  quitted 
France  and  became  the  second  ancestor  of  the  Har- 
courts of  England. 

"We  will  not,"  he  says  in  conclusion,  "guarantee 
this  assertion  of  a  not  very  scrupulous  historian,  but 
we  can  affirm  that  those  of  the  English  genealogists 
are  utterly  false." 

Now  disregarding  the  very  strong  language  in 
which  this  learned  and  generally  courteous  gentleman 
has  pronounced  his  opinion,  he  has  made  a  singular 
mistake  in  accusing  our  genealogists  of  having  created 
Harcourts  in  order  to  fabricate  a  pedigree. 

If  there  be  any  fabrication  it  is  the  work  of  his  own 
countrymen,  and  we  can  only  be  blamed  for  believing- 
them.  Pere  Anselm,  following  La  Roque,  states  that 
Anchetil  had  by  his  wife,  Eve  de  Boessey,  seven  sons. 


234         THE  CONQUEEOE  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

Errand,    Robert,    Jean,  Arnold,   Gervais,  Yves,  and 
Renauld  de  Harcourt. 

Here  are  two,  at  any  rate,  out  of  the  three  laid  at 
the  door  of  the  genealogist,  and  what  proof  that  they 
are  apocryphal  ?  What  evidence  to  show  that  they 
were  not  at  Hastings  with  their  brother  Errand? 
That  an  Arnoul  de  Harcourt  was  in  England,  and 
killed  in  a  skirmish  with  the  Welsh  either  in  the 
mysterious  battle  of  Cardiff  in  1094,  according  to  the 
Welsh  Chronicles,  or  in  some  one  of  the  other  frays 
which  have  been  mixed  with  it  by  the  Norman  his- 
torians, I  think  there  can  be  little  doubt.  At  all 
events,  the  name  is  not  likely  to  have  been  invented 
by  the  Welsh,  and  there  is  nothing  in  the  date  to  pre- 
vent his  being  the  son  of  Anchetil,  recorded  by  La 
Roque.  It  may  be  quite  true  that  the  Harcourts  did 
not  settle  in  England  before  the  reign  of  John,  but 
how  does  that  prove  that  none  of  their  ancestors 
fought  at  Senlac  ? 


WILLIAM  PAINEL. 

The  important  family  of  Paisnel,  Painel  or  Paganell, 
as  it  is  variously  written  in  French  or  English  docu- 
ments (latinised  Paganellus),  were  Lords  of  Moustiers- 
Hubert,  in  the  arrondissement  of  Lisieux. 


WILLIAM  PAINEL.  233 

"  Des  Moustiers-Hubert  Painals" 

is  named  by  Wace  in  his  "Roman  de  Ecu" 
(1.  13,630),  in  company  with  Avenel  de  Biarz  and 
Kobert  Bertram  the  Crooked,  as  killing  many  of  the 
English. 

Le  PreVost  remarks  that  there  are  two  ways  of 
reading  the  above  line — "  Hubert  Paisnel  of  Mous- 
tiers,"  or  "  Paisnel  of  Moustiers-Hubert,"  and  adopts 
the  latter  as  the  more  correct,  the  Paisnels  being  the 
ancient  proprietors  of  the  district  so  called,  a  William 
Paisnel,  who  founded  the  Abbey  of  Hambie  in  1145, 
making  sundry  donations  to  it  derivable  from  his 
forest  and  castle  of  Moustiers-Hubert.  He  therefore 
suggests  that  the  Painel  of  Wace  was  an  earlier 
William,  who  is  mentioned  by  Orderic  as  dying  about 
the  same  time  as  the  Conqueror. 

In  the  Roll  printed  by  Leland  of  the  noble  Normans 
who  came  into  England  with  William  the  Conqueror, 
absurdly  represented  as  specially  the  followers  of 
William  de  Mohun,  the  name  occurs  of  Hubert 
Paignel ;  but  that  is  evidently  only  the  copyist's 
interpretation  of  the  language  of  Wace,  and  little 
-doubt  can  exist  that  it  was  the  William  Paisnel  men- 
tioned by  Orderic  who  was  in  the  army  at  Hastings, 
and  who  subscribed  a  charter  to  the  Cathedral  of 
Bayeux  in  1073.  He  is  said  by  Orderic  to  have 


236         THE  CONQUEROR  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

died  "  about  the  same  period  "  as  King  William.  It 
must  have  been  a  year  or  so  before  him,  as  Ralph 
Painel  is  the  tenant  in  Domesday,  holding  forty-five 
lordships  in  1085,  and  no  mention  is  made  of  William, 
to  whom  he  had  succeeded  either  as  son  or  brother. 
This  Ralph  founded,  in  1089  (second  William  Rufus), 
the  Priory  of  the  Holy  Trinity  at  York  for  nuns,  on  the 
site  of  a  house  for  canons  which  had  been  destroyed 
by  that  devoted  son  of  the  Church,  the  Conqueror. 

Either  Ralph,  or  his  son  Fulk  Painel,  married 
Beatrice,  daughter  and  sole  heir  of  William  Fitz 
Ansculph,  a  probable  companion  of  the  Conqueror, 
and  the  possessor  of  vast  domains  in  England  at  the 
time  of  the  survey,  the  greater  portion,  if  not  all,  of 
which  she  brought  into  the  family  of  Painel,  particu- 
larly her  father's  principal  seat,  Dudley  Castle,  in  the 
county  of  Stafford,  which  was  demolished  in  the  reign  of 
Henry  II.,  in  consequence  of  Gervase  Painel,  the  then 
possessor,  being  in  rebellion. 

WALTER  D'AINCOURT. 

The  name  of  D'Aincourt  is  not  mentioned  by  Wace, 
unless  it  has  been  derived  from  Driencourt,  a 
suggestion  thrown  out  by  Mr.  Taylor  which  I  am  by 
no  means  inclined  to  adopt,  as  the  original  name  of 
Neufchatel-en-Bray  was  Drincourt  (Driencuria),  and 


WALTER  D'AINCOURT.  237 

we  have  evidence  of  a  family  of  that  name  being  in 
existence  previous  to  the  Conquest.  In  a  cartulary 
of  the  Abbey  of  the  Holy  Trinity  du-Mont-de-Eouen, 
under  the  date  of  1030,  the  names  are  found  of  Kichard 
de  Drincourt,  Harold  de  Drincourt,  and  Hugh  de 
Drincourt ;  and  Monsieur  de  la  Mairie,*  to  whom  we 
are  indebted  for  this  information,  tells  us  also  that  a 
Sire  de  Drincourt,  who  accompanied  Duke  William  in 
his  expedition  to  England,  was  killed  in  the  battle  of 
Hastings,  a  circumstance  which  would  account  for  his 
name  not  appearing  in  Domesday.  The  name  of  the 
place  itself  also  gradually  disappeared  at  the  com- 
mencement of  the  twelfth  century,  being  called  "  Le 
Neufchatel  de  Drincort,"  from  a  castle  built  there  by 
Henry  I.  in  1106,  and  subsequently  Neufchatel  only. 
It  would  seem  that  the  Sire  de  Driencourt  slain  at 
Senlac  was  the  last  of  the  family. 

The  Aincourts  derived  their  name  from  a  parish  in  the 
Vexin-Normand,  between  Mantes  and  Magny  so  called, 
the  patronage  of  which  was  given  by  one  of  the 
descendants  of  Walter  to  the  Abbey  of  Bee. 

The  services  of  Walter  d'Aincourt,  whatever  they 
may  have  been,  were  rewarded  by  the  Conqueror  with 
the  gift  of  fifty-five  lordships  in  England,  of  which 

*  Eecherches  sur  le  Bray  Normand  et  le  Bray  Picard.  Tom.  i., 
p.  233. 


238         THE  CONQUEEOE  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

Blankney  in  Lincolnshire  was  one,  and  made  by  him 
the  head  of  his  barony. 

Of  his  origin  and  antecedents  no  more  is  known 
than  of  his  actions.  Contemporary  history  is  en- 
tirely silent  about  him.  We  do  not  find  him 
engaged  in  any  combat,  intrusted  with  any  office, 
employed  on  any  mission,  founding  or  endowing  any 
monastic  establishment,  or  even  witnessing  a  charter, 
and  might  well  doubt  his  having  ever  existed  but  for 
the  enumeration  of  his  possessions  in  Domesday,  and 
the  epitaph  of  his  son  William  in  Lincoln  Cathedral, 
on  a  leaden  plate  found  in  his  grave  in  the  church- 
yard there.  From  that  we  learn  that  he  was  a  kins- 
man of  Eemi  or  Remigius,  Bishop  of  Lincoln,  who, 
according  to  Taylor's  List,  contributed  a  ship  and 
twenty  knights  or  men-at-arms  to  the  fleet  of  Duke 
William,  a  fact  that  leads  one  to  the  conclusion  that  the 
lucky  Walter  owed  his  barony  to  the  good  offices  of 
the  bishop,  and  not  to  any  merit  of  his  own. 

His  son  William  is  stated  in  his  epitaph  to  have 
been  in  some  way  descended  from  royalty.  "  Prse- 
fatus  Willielmus  regige  stirpe  progenitus."  How 
provoking  are  these  vague  insinuations.  The  descent 
must  have  been  through  his  mother,  as  the  wording  of 
the  sentence  expressly  limits  the  honour  to  William, 
and  not  even  her  baptismal  name  is  known  to  us. 


SAMSON  D'ANSNEVILLE.  239 

William  died  in  the  reign  of  Eufus,  leaving  a  son 
and  heir  named  Ralph,  who  was  the  founder  of 
Thurgarton  Priory.  The  male  line  became  extinct  in 
the  twenty-first  of  Henry  VI.,  by  the  death  of  Robert, 
uncle  of  William,  last  Baron  d'Eyncourt,  when 
Margaret  and  Alice,  sisters  of  the  said  William,  were 
found  his  heirs  and  carried  the  estates  into  the 
families  of  Cromwell  and  Lovel. 

SAMSON  D'ANSNEVILLE. 

Wace  records,  as  forming  one  of  a  troop  or  company 
of  Norman  knights  who  charged  together,  "  fearing 
neither  stake  nor  fosse,  and  overthrowing  and  killing 
may  a  good  horse  and  man,"  a  certain  "  Sire  de  Val 
de  Saire."  M.  le  PreVost  rather  too  hastily  observes 
in  a  note  on  this  passage  :  "  Our  author  takes  Val  de 
Saire  for  the  name  of  a  lordship,  while  it  is  that  of  a 
canton  in  the  peninsular  of  the  Cotentin.  The  mis- 
take is  still  more  extraordinary  for  him  to  have  made, 
as  that  part  of  the  province  was  well  known  to  him." 

The  commentator  has  himself  fallen  into  an  error. 
He  seems  not  to  have  been  aware  that  there  was 
a  noble  Norman  family  of  the  name  of  Ansneville, 
derived  from,  or  given  by  them  to  a  parish  in  Val  de 
Saire,  of  which  they  were  the  lords. 

The  chronicle  of  the  Abbey  of  St.  Etienne  at  Caen, 


240         THE  CONQUEEOE  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

as  well  as  the  history  of  the  Island  of  Guernsey, 
furnish  us  with  the  earliest  information  respect- 
ing the  family  of  Ansneville.  Previous  to  the  year 
1050,  some  pirates  from  the  Bay  -of  Biscay  re- 
peatedly ravaged  the  Island  of  Guernsey,  at  that 
time  belonging  to  Normandy,  and  finally  established 
themselves  there.  The  inhabitants  not  being  able  to 
eject  them,  applied  to  their  Duke,  William,  for  assist- 
ance. He  was  at  that  time  at  his  favourite  residence 
at  Valognes,  and  immediately  sent  a  force  under  the 
command  of  Samson  d' Ansneville,  who  destroyed  the 
forts  built  by  the  pirates,  and  drove  them  out  of  the 
island,  to  which  they  never  returned. 

In  1061,  according  to  an  entry  of  that  date  in  an 
Exchequer  Koll  at  Eouen,  Duke  William  gave  to 
Samson  d' Ansneville,  "  his  esquire,"  and  to  the 
Abbey  of  Mont  St.  Michael,  half  of  the  Isle  of 
Guernsey  in  equal  portions,  the  said  Samson  d' Ansne- 
ville engaging  for  himself  and  his  heirs  to  serve  the 
Duke  and  his  successors  as  esquires  of  the  body 
whenever  they  came  into  the  island,  to  pay  ten 
livres  for  livery  of  the  land,  do  homage,  and  perform 
all  other  services  due  to  the  Duke  and  the  duchy. 

In  1066,  at  the  time  of  the  Conquest,  and  during 
the  regency  of  Queen  Matilda,  a  Seigneur  d' Ansneville 
was  Governor  of  the  Val  de  Saire,  and  in  Domesday 


SAMSON  D'ANSXEVILLE:  241 


occur  the  names  of  William  and  Humphrey  Ansneville 
as  subtenants,  the  former  of  Earl  Roger  cle  Mont- 
gomeri  in  Hampshire,  and  the  latter  of  Eudo  Dapifer 
in  Hertfordshire. 

The  authors  of  "  Researches  sur  le  Domesday " 
assume  that  the  Seigneur  d' Ansneville,  Governor  of 
Val  de  Saire  in  1066,  was  a  brother  of  Samson,  and 
that  William  and  Humphrey  were  his  sons,  he  Samson 
being  deceased  previous  to  the  compilation  of  the 
survey.  Without  speculating  upon  the  relationship 
to  each  other  of  these  personages,  I  will  only  point 
out  that  the  connection  of  the  family  of  Ansneville, 
Anslevillc,  Asneville,  and  Anneville,  its  latest  form  as 
now  borne  by  the  descendants  in  France,  with  the 
canton  of  Yal  de  Saire  would  fully  justify  Master 
Wace  in  designating  the  particular  member  of  it  in 
the  Duke's  army  as  a  "  Sire  "  (he  does  not  say  "  Seig- 
neur") "  de  Val  de  Saire." 

In  a  more  corrupted  form  the  family  name  may  be 
recognised  in  the  Roll  of  Battle  Abbey  in  Andeville, 
while  in  Brompton's  List,  by  the  amalgamation  of  the 
"  de "  with  it,  it  becomes  Dandevile  (d'Aundevyle), 
under  which  it  is  familiar  to  us  in  England. 

Which  of  the  Ansnevilles  fought  at  Senlac  I  will 
not  presume  to  guess  ;  but  Samson  was  a  contem- 
porary and  a  liegeman  of  the  Duke,  sworn  to  do  him 


VOL.   II. 


2*2         THE  CONQUEEOE  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

suit  and  service,  and  I  have  therefore  placed  his  name 
at  the  head  of  this  notice. 


HAMO  DE  CEEVECCEUB. 

Wace  speaks  of  a  Sire  "  de  Crevecoeur,"  who,  in 
company  with  those  of  Driencourt  and  Briencort, 
followed  the  Duke  wherever  he  went  in  the  battle. 

I  think  he  might  have  spoken  in  the  plural,  for  it 
is  highly  probable  that  two  of  the  family  were  in  the 
Duke's  army. 

You  have  already  heard  of  Hamon-aux-Dents,  or 
"with  the  teeth,"  who  was  killed  in  the  battle  of 
Val-es-Dunes  in  1045.  He  left  two  sons,  the  eldest 
Hamo  or  Hamon,  who  became  Dapifer  to  King  Wil- 
liam, and  the  second  Robert,  both  of  whom  subscribe 
a  charter  of  the  Conqueror  to  the  Abbey  of  St.  Denis, 
at  Paris.  The  latter  appears  to  have  died  without 
legitimate  issue  before  Domesday  was  compiled. 
Hamo,  the  Dapifer,  was  sheriff  of  Kent,  and  one  of 
the  judges  in  the  cause  between  Lanfranc  and  Odo, 
Bishop  of  Bayeux.  He  had  two  sons,  the  eldest, 
Robert  Fitz  Hamon,  a  prominent  personage  in  the 
reign  of  Rufus  and  of  Henry  I.,  the  founder  of  Tewkes- 
bury  and  father  of  Mabel,  wife  of  Robert  de  Caen, 
Earl  of  Gloucester.  Of  the  second  son,  Hamo,  nothing 


HAMO  DE  CBEVECCEUR.  243 

appears  absolutely  known,  but  I  believe  him  to  be  the 
progenitor  of  that  family  of  Crevecoeur,  the  last  male 
of  which,  Hamon  de  Crevecoeur,  married,  temp. 
Richard  I.,  Maude  d'Avranches,  the  great  heiress  of 
Folkestone. 

But  who  then  was  the  Sire  de  Crevecoeur  who 
fought  at  Senlac  ?  We  must  hark  back  to  examine 
that  question. 

Hamon-aux-Dents  was  Lord  of  Thorigny  and 
Creulli ;  but,  dying  in  rebellion,  his  estates  would  be 
forfeited,  and  we  consequently  find  his  grandson, 
Robert  Fitz  Hamon,  coming  over  to  England  with 
Duke  William,  described  as  a  young  man,  Lord  of 
Astremeville,  in  Normandy,*  a  designation  soon  lost 
sight  of  in  the  great  honour  of  Gloucester  bestowed 

O  o 

upon  him  by  Rufus,  his  conquest  of  Glamorgan,  and 
the  lordships  of  a  host  of  manors  and  castles  seized  or 
given  to  him  by  Jestin  ap  Gurgunt  for  his  assistance 
against  Rhys,  Prince  of  South  Wales,  in  1091. 

His  father  is  only  known  as  Hamo  the  Dapifer,  or 
"  Hamo  Vice-comes,"  holding  certain  lands  in  England, 
but  not  as  the  possessor  of  any  seigneurie  in  Nor- 
mandy. Hasted,  however,  asserts  that  his  family- 
name  was  Crevecoeur,  implying,  of  course,  his  posses- 
sion of  a  fief  of  that  name,  Crevecoeur-en-Auge,  in  the 

*  Dugdale,  MOD.  Aug.  yol.  i.  p.  154. 

R  2 


244         THE  CONQUEROR  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

arronclissement  of  Lisieux,  which  might  have  passed  to 
his  son  Hamon,  Robert  succeeding  to  Astremeville. 

If  Hasted  had  satisfactory  authority  for  his  assertion, 
and  I  have  found  nothing  whatever  to  contradict  or 
throw  the  least  doubt  upon  it,  Hamo  the  Dapifer 
must  surely  have  been  "  the  Sire  de  Crevecoeur "  of 
the  "  Roman  de  Rou."  Robert  Fitz  Hamon,  we  know, 
had  no  male  issue  but  Hamon ;  Fitz  Hamon  I  take  to 
be  the  father  of  the  first  Robert  de  Crevecoeur  of  whom 
we  are  cognizant,  who,  in  1119,  founded  the  Priory  of 
Leeds,  in  Kent,  and  had,  by  his  wife  Rohais,  three 
sons,  Adam,  Elias,  and  Daniel,  and  a  daughter  named 
Gunnora. 

He  was  succeeded  by  Daniel,  who,  in  the  12th  of 
Henry  II.,  on  assessment  of  aid  for  the  marriage  of 
the  King's  daughter,  certified  to  the  possession  of 
fourteen  knights'  fees  "  de  veteri  feoffemento,"  and 
his  son  and  successor,  another  Robert,  was  the  father 
of  Hamon,  the  last  of  the  race  and  name,  who 
married  the  heiress  of  Folkestone. 


PICOT  DE  SAY. 

"Gil  de  Saie,"  mentioned  by  Wace  (1.  13,712),  is 
supposed  to  be  Picot  de  Say,  one  of  a  family  deriving 
their  name  from  Say,  near  Argentan,  the  lords  of 


TICOT  DE  SAY.  245 


which  were    vassals    of    Koger    cle    Montgomeri   in 
Normandy,  as  well  as  subsequently  in  England. 

In  1060,  Robert  Picot  de  Say,  Adeloyse  his  wife, 
their  sons  Eobert  and  Henri,  and  Osmelin  de  Say 
and  Avitia  his  wife,  were  benefactors  to  the  Church  of 
St.  Martin  of  Seez,  and  in  Domesday  we  find  Picot  de 
Say  registered  holding  under  Earl  Roger  twenty- nine 
manors  in  Shropshire.  In  1083  he  was  amongst  the 
barons  invited  by  the  Earl  to  witness  his  foundation  of 
the  Abbey  of  Shrewsbury.  He  had  probably  followed 
his  feudal  lord  to  England  in  1067,  and  would  not, 
therefore,  in  that  case  have  been  at  Senlac ;  but,  at 
the  same  time  some  of  the  family  might  have  been 
in  the  invading  army,  and  as  Wace  has  represented 
Roger  de  Montgomeri  as  a  leader  in  it,  he  would  be 
likely  to  name  one  of  his  principal  vassals  as  fighting 
in  his  company.  Picot  appears  to  have  been  the  here- 
ditary name  of  the  family,  it  being  sometimes  used  by 
itself,  as  in  the  instance  of  Picot  Vicecomes,  or  Picot 
of  Cambridge,  one  of  the  founders  of  the  Priory  of 
Barn  well,  or  with  a  baptismal  name  prefixed  to  it,  as 
in  that  of  Robert  Picot  de  Say  above  mentioned.  It 
it  doubtful,  however,  whether  the  Picot  of  Cambridge 
was  of  the  same  family  as  Picot  de  Say,  and  it  is  the 
name  of  Say  that  is  most  prominent  in  Anglo-Norman 
history  ;  Enguerrand  de  Say  having  been  a  distin- 


246         THE  CONQUEROR  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 


guished  warrior  in  the  reign  of  Stephen  and  William 
de  Say,  and  by  his  marriage  with  Beatrice,  sister  of 
Geoffrey  de  Mandeville,  Earl  of  Essex,  increasing  the 
wealth  and  power  of  both  families. 

A  William  de  Say,  the  grandfather  of  that  William, 
married  Agnes,  daughter  of  Hugh  de  Grentmesnil 
(see  page  83,  ante),  and  might  have  been  in  the 
battle  with  his  father-in-law,  as  confidently  stated  in 
the  pedigree  of  the  Lords  Say  and  Sele,  who  deduce 
their  descent  from  him  through  the  family  of  Fiennes, 
as  do  also  the  Dukes  of  Newcastle. 

The  Pigots,  or  Pigotts,  assume  to  be  the  descendants 
of  the  Norman  Picots  of  Domesday,  one  family  from 
the  Shropshire  and  the  other  from  the  Cheshire  branch. 
We  have  nothing,  however,  but  probability  to  guide  us 
in  our  attempt  to  identify  the  actual  companion  of  the 
Conqueror  indicated  by  Master  Wace,  nor  have  we 
any  materials  for  the  biography  of  any  Sire  de  Say 
who  might  be  entitled  to  that  distinction. 


CHAPTER  X 


EGBERT  BERTRAM. 
HUGH  DE  PORT. 
WILLIAM          DE          COLOM- 
BIERES. 


ROBERT  D  ESTOUTEVILLE. 
WILLIAM  PEVEREL. 


ROBERT   BERTRAM. 

"  Robert  Bertram,  ki  esteit  torz." 

Rom.  de  Ron,  I.  13,634. 

HERE  we  have  not  only  the  baptismal  name, 
but  a  personal  description  to  assist  us  in  identi- 
fying this  companion  of  the  Conqueror.  "  Robert 
Bertram,  who  was  crooked,  but  was  very  strong  on 
horseback,  had  with  him  a  great  force,  and  many  men 
fell  before  him." 

Notwithstanding  these  particulars,  and  the  fact  that 
Bertram,  surnamed  "  le  Tort,"  or  the  crooked,  is  a  real 
personage,  who  was  Seigneur  of  Briquebec,  near  Valo- 
nore,  who  founded,  before  the  Conquest,  the  Priory  of 
"  Bcaumont-en-Auge,"  and  on  his  death  bed  (immi- 
nente  morte)  made  sundry  donations  to  the  Abbey  of 


248         THE   CONQUEEOE  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

St.  Stephen  at  Caen,  about  1082,  M.  le  PreVost  tells. 
us  it  is  commonly  considered  that  it  was  not  Robert 
Bertram  who  took  part  in  the  expedition,  but  William 
Bertram,  probably  his  brother ;  and  also  that  he  was 
son  or  grandson  of  Toustain  de  Bastenbourg,  pro- 
genitors of  the  Lords  of  Briquebec  and  those  of 
Montfort. 

Mr.  Taylor  presumes  that  both  William  and  Robert 
were  in  the  battle,  which  I  will  not  dispute ;  but  I 
believe  Waco  to  be  right  in  this  instance,  as  well  as  in 
many  others  which  have  been  questioned  but  not 
disproved.  Kobert  Bertram  was  evidently  dead  before 
the  compilation  of  Domesday ;  and  Dugdale  makes 
no  mention  of  him,  beginning  his  account  of  the 
family  with  William,  Baron  of  Mitford,  who,  with  the 
consent  of  Hawise  his  wife,  as  also  of  Roger,  Guy, 
William,  and  Richard,  his  sons,  founded,  temp, 
Henry  I.,  the  Priory  of  Brinkholm,  Northumberland, 
for  canons  regular  of  the  order  of  St.  Augustin.  The 
branch  of  the  Bertrams  of  Bothall  I  take  to  be  the 
eldest,  and  Richard,  the  first  of  that  line  mentioned,  to 
have  been  a  grandson  of  Robert,  as  he  held  the  barony 
of  Bothall  in  capite  of  the  King,  Henry  II.,  by  the 
service  of  three  knights'  fees,  as  his  ancestors  had 
done,  "  de  veteri  feoffemento,"  and  confirmed  to  the 
monks  of  Loirmouth  two  sheaves  out  of  his  lordship 


HUGH  DE  PORT.  249 


of    Bothall,    which    they   had   of    the    gift    of     his 
ancestors. 

The  male  Hue  of  the  Bertrams  of  Mitford  failed  in 
the  reign  of  Edward  II.,  and  that  of  Bothall  in  the 
reign  following.  Agnes,  eldest  sister  and  co-heir  of 
Eoger,  the  last  Baron  of  Mitford,  married  Sir  Thomas 
Fitzwilliam  of  Sprotborough,  an  ancestor  of  the 
Earls  Fitzwilliam. 

HUGH  DE  POET. 

"  Cil  de  Port,"  alluded  to  by  Wace  (Rom.  de 
Rou,  1.  13,613),  may  have  been  either  Hugh  or 
Hubert  de  Port,  a  commune  in  the  Bessin,  near 
Bayeux,  for  both  are  reported  to  have  been  in  the 
battle,  but  I  have  specially  named  Hugh,  as,  from  his 
share  of  the  spoil,  it  is  evident  he  must  have  been  the 
most  prominent  in  the  fight  for  it,  "  slaying  many 
English  that  day."  At  the  time  of  the  survey  he  held 
fifty-five  manors  in  Hampshire  of  the  King,  one  of 
which  was  Basing,  the  head  of  his  barony ;  likewise 
twelve  more  of  Odo,  Bishop  of  Bayeux  (in  whose  com- 
pany most  likely  he  came) ;  one  in  Dorsetshire,  and  two 
in  Cambridgeshire  ;  in  all  seventy  lordships. 

We  hear  nothing  more  about  him  till  the  ninth  of 
Eufus  (1096),  in  which  year  he  gave  to  the  monks  of 
Gloucester  his  lordship  of  Littletone,  in  Northampton- 


2JO         THE  CONQUEEOE  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 


shire,  a  subsequent  acquisition,  probably  by  marriage, 
and  assuming  the  monastic  habit  at  Winchester,  ended 
his  days  there,  leaving,  by  an  unnamed  wife,  Henry,  his 
son  and  heir,  who  founded  the  Priory  of  Shirebourn, 
near  Basing. 

O 

A  Gilbert  as  well  as  a  Hubert  de  Port  appears  as 
witness  to  various  charters  from  1080  to  1082. 

Adam  de  Port,  grandson  of  the  Henry  above  men- 
tioned, married  Mabel  de  Aurevalle,  daughter  and  heir 
of  Muriel  de  St.  John,  whose  grandfather,  William  de  St. 
John,  is  stated  to  have  been  a  companion  of  the  Con- 
queror, which  is  possibly  true  ;  but  he  is  also  described 
as  the  "Grand  Master  of  Artillery" — a  title  which  would 
mislead  a  reader  who  was  not  sufficiently  an  antiquary 
to  know  that  Artillaria  was  a  term  in  use  long  before 
the  invention  of  cannon,  and  signified  munitions  of 
war  in  general,  but  more  especially  the  machines  con- 
structed for  the  purpose  of  casting  heavy  stones  and 
other  missiles,  movable  towers  for  assaulting  a  castle, 
battering  rams,  &c.  It  would  be  interesting  to 
discover  what  authority  there  is  for  this  family  tradi- 
tion. In  the  Bayeux  Tapestry  we  see  men  bearing 
body  armour  and  lances  to  the  ships,  but  no  catapults, 
mangonels,  or  balistse  ;  nor  does  Wace  or  any  other 
author  speak  of  such  engines  being  conveyed  on 
board  the  fleet  to  England  ;  but  in  the  wider  sense  of 


WILLIAM  DE  COLOMBIEBES.  251 


the  word,  as  may  be  seen  by  reference  to  Ducange, 
William  de  St.  John  might  have  been  Magister  Artil- 
lariae,  having  the  care  of  all  the  military  store?,  armour, 
and  weapons  included. 

The  son  of  Adam  de  Port  and  Mabel  de  Aurevalle 
assumed  the  name  of  St.  John  as  representative  of  his 
mother's  family ;  and  from  his  great-grandson  John, 
Lord  St.  John  of  Basing,  descended  the  Marquises  of 
Winchester,  the  Dukes  of  Bolton,  the  Barons  St.  John 
of  Bletshoe,  the.  Viscounts  Grandison,  the  Earls  of 
Jersey,  and  the  Earls  and  Viscounts  Bolingbroke. 

"  Awake,  my  St.  John,  leave  all  minor  things 
To  low  ambition  and  the  pi-ide  of  kings." 

Pope  has  done  more  to  immortalize  the  name  of 
St.  John  than  the  Grand  Master  of  the  Artillery  of 
William  the  Conqueror. 

WILLIAM  DE   COLOMBIERES. 

Little  is  known  of  this  personage  mentioned  by 
Wace  (Rom.  de  Ron,  1.  13,462)  beyond  the  fact  of  the 
occurrence  of  his  name  in  a  charter  in  favour  of  the 
Abbey  aux  Dames  at  Caen  in  1032. 

He  was  probably  deceased  before  the  compilation 
of  Domesday,  in  which  a  Rannulph  de  Columbcls 
is  returned  as  the  holder  of  sundry  manors  in  Kent, 
the  reward  of  the  services  rendered  to  the  Conqueror 


THE  CONQUEROB  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 


cither  by  Bannulph  himself  or  the  William  of  Wace, 
whom  he  might  have  succeeded.  Colombieres  is  in 
the  arrondissement  of  Bayeux,  and  it  is  worthy  of 
note  that  in  the  charter  above  mentioned  a  Raoul 
cVAsnieres  is  found  in  company  with  the  Lord  de 
Columbieres.  Asnieres  being  in  the  same  arrondisse- 
ment, and  "  Gilbert  le  viel  d'Asnieres  "  coupled  with 
"  Willame  de  Columbieres  "  in  the  "  Eoman  de  Kou," 
it  is  fairly  presumable  that  they  were  near  connections 
as  well  as  near  neighbours.  The  family  of  Colom- 
bieres (Columbers,  Columbels)  alone  appears  to  have 
struck  root  in  England,  and  had  become  an  important 
baronial  family  in  the  reign  of  Henry  II.,  in  the  12th 
of  whose  reign  Philip  de  Columbers  accounted  for  ten 
knights'  fees  "  de  veteri  feoffemento  "  and  one  "  de 
novo,"  and  in  the  22nd  of  the  same  reign  paid  twenty 
marks  for  trespassing  in  the  King's  forests.  Dugdale's 
account  only  begins  with  this  Philip,  and  he  has  not 
noticed  that  in  a  Plea  Eoll  of  Henry  II.  Roger  Bacon 
is  set  down  as  brother  to  Philip  de  Columbers,  nor 
that  a  Gilbert  de  Columbers  was  a  contemporary  of 
Philip  and  settled  in  Berkshire.  (Lib.  Niger.) 

The  family  of  Columbers  intermarried  with  the 
families  of  Chaudos  and  Courtenai,  and  were  Seigneurs 
of  Dudevill,  in  Normandy ;  but  the  male  line  failed  in 
England  towards  the  close  of  the  13th  century. 


ROBERT  D'ESTjTJTEVILLE.  2o3 


ROBERT  D'ESTOUTEVILLE. 

The  "  Sire  d'Estoteville  "  of  the  "  Roman  cle  Rou  " 
(1.  13,561)  was  in  all  probability  Robert,  surnamed 
Fronteboeuf,  Granteboef,  or,  according  to  the  French 
antiquaries,  Grand-bois ;  but  whether  he  was  of  Es- 
touteville-sur-Cailly  or  Estouteville-sur-Mer  may  be 
an  open  question.  There  was  a  knightly  family 
deriving  their  name  from  the  former  (at  present  a 
commune  in  the  canton  of  Bouchy,  arrondissement  de 
Rouen),  one  of  whom,  Nicholas  d'Estouteville,  the 
great-great-grandson  of  Robert,  married  Gunnor  or 
Gunnora,  daughter  of  Hugh  IV.  de  Gournay,  and 
widow  of  Robert  de  Gant,  in  the  12th  century,  and 
received  with  her  in  dower  the  manors  of  Beddingfield 
and  Kimberly  in  Norfolk,  which  remained  for  many 
generations  in  the  family  of  Stuteville,  as  it  is 
called  in  England.  This  Estouteville  was  formerly  a 
mouvance,  i.e.,  a  dependency  on  the  fief  of  La  Ferte- 
en-Brai,  of  which  the  Gournays  were  the  lords,  and  it 
is  therefore  likely  that  Robert  d'Estouteville  followed 
Hugh  II.  de  Gournay  to  England  in  the  invading 
army. 

Dugdale's  account  of  him  and  his  son  is  very 
meagre  and  incorrect,  and  neither  M.  le  Prevost  nor 


254         THE  COXQUEEOR  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 


Mr.  Edward  Taylor  has  taken  any  trouble  on  the 
subject,  although  some  information  has  been  furnished 
us  by  Orderic  which  enables  me  to  correct  Dugdale 
and  answer  the  observation  of  M.  le  Prevost,  echoed  by 
Mr.  Taylor,  that  he  (Robert)  must  have  been  very 
young  if  he  was  the  same  who  fell  forty  years  after  at 
Tenchebrai,  in  1106,  by  the  simple  assurance  to  them 
that  he  was  not  the  same. 

Some  ten  or  eleven  years  previous  to  the  Conquest, 
Robert  I.  d'Estouteville  was  governor  of  the  Castle  of 
Ambrieres,  and  stoutly  defended  it  against  Geoffrey 
Martel  until  relieved  by  the  approach  of  Duke  William. 
He  could  not  therefore  have  been  very  young  even  at 
that  time — say  between  twenty  and  thirty,  and  in 
1066  he  would  have  been  between  thirty  and  forty. 
Of  his  exploits  at  Senlac  we  hear  nothing,  and  his 
name  does  not  appear  in  Domesday,  so  we  are  in 
ignorance  of  the  reward,  if  any,  which  he  received  for 
his  services.  The  latest  mention  of  him  is  by 
Orderic,  who  records  him  as  a  witness  to  a  confirma- 
tion charter  of  William  son  of  Fulk  de  Querneville, 
Dean  of  Evreux,  to  the  Abbey  of  Ouche  or  St.  Evroult, 
before  the  year  1089. 

The  date  of  his  death  is  unascertained  ;  but  he  was 
succeeded  by  his  son  Robert  II.  d'Estouteville,  alto- 
gether omitted  by  Dugdale,  but  in  connection  with 


EOBEET  D'ESTOUTEYILLE. 


whom  the  following  strange  story  is  told  by  Orderic 
(lib.  XL,  cap.  xiii.)  : — 

"The  same  year  (1106)  the  following  occurrence 
happened  in  Normandy  : — Robert  d'Estoteville,  a 
brave  and  powerful  baron,  was  a  strong  partizan  of 
the  Duke  (Robert  Court-heuse),  and  superintended  his 
troops  and  fortresses  in  the  Pays  de  Caux.  It  chanced 
on  Easter-day  (9th  of  April,  1105-6),  as  his  chaplain 
was  administering  the  holy  sacrament  to  the  baron  and 
his  household,  that  a  certain  knight  having  approached 
the  altar  for  the  purpose  of  reverently  receiving  the 
Eucharist,  the  priest  took  the  consecrated  wafer  in  his 
hand  for  the  purpose  of  putting  it  into  the  mouth  of 
the  communicant,  but  found  that  he  was  quite  inca- 
pable of  lifting  his  hand  from  the  altar.  Both  parties 
were  exceedingly  terrified  by  this  circumstance,  but  at 
length  the  priest  said  to  the  knight,  '  Take  it  if  you 
can  ;  for  myself,  it  is  out  of  my  power  to  move  my 
hand  and  deliver  the  Lord's  body  to  you.'  Upon  this 
the  knight  stretched  his  neck  over  the  altar,  with 
some  effort  reached  the  chalice,  and  received  the  Host 
in  his  open  mouth  from  the  priest's  hand.  This  ex- 
traordinary occurrence  covered  him  with  confusion, 
and  apprehending  some  misfortune,  but  of  what 
nature  he  knew  not,  he  distributed  in  consequence 
the  greatest  portion  of  his  wardrobe  and  other  pro- 


256         THE  CONQUEROK  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

perty  amongst  the  poor  and  clergy.  He  was  slain 
soon  after  Easter  in  the  first  battle  fought  at  Ma- 
romme,  near  Rouen. 

"  The  chaplain,  whose  name  was  Robert,  related  to 
me  what  happened  to  him  and  the  unfortunate  knight, 
as  I  have  stated,  during  the  celebration  of  the  life- 
giving  mysteries." 

The  effect  of  this  alarming  miracle  on  Robert,  the 
Lord  of  Estouteville,  and  his  family,  who  were  wit- 
nesses of  it,  is  not  recorded,  but  it  is  possible  they 
might  have  some  gloomy  forebodings  as  respected 
themselves,  which  were  speedily  verified  ;  for  Robert, 
the  son  and  heir  of  this  Robert  II.,  was  taken  prisoner 
by  King  Henry  I.  a  few  months  afterwards,  at  the 
storming  of  Dive,  and  his  father  also  at  the  battle  of 
Tenchebrai,  closely  following.  The  son  was  liberated; 
but  the  elder  Robert  was  sent  a  captive  to  England 
and  immured  for  life  in  a  dungeon,  and  the  whole  of 
his  estates  were  seized  and  bestowed  by  King  Henry 
on  Nigel  de  Albini,  ancestor  of  the  second  race  of  the 
Mowbrays. 

It  was  Robert  III.  de  Stoteville,  or  Stuteville, 
the  young  knight  who  was  taken  at  Dive,  who  dis- 
tinguished himself  in  the  battle  of  the  Standard 
(temp.  Stephen),  and  was  made  sheriff  of  Yorkshire 
by  Henry  II.,  in  the  sixteenth  year  of  his  reign, 


EGBERT  D'ESTOUTEVILLE.  257 

and  who  was  in  possession  at  that  time  of  seven  or  eight 
knights'  fees  in  England,  how  acquired  does  not  appear, 
but  as  he  was  twice  married,  his  second  wife  being 
Sibilla,  sister  of  Philip  de  Valoines,  it  is  probable  that 
some  of  the  lands  came  to  him  with  his  wives- 
Thorpenhow,  in  the  county  of  Cumberland,  he  certainly 
had  in  frank  marriage  with  the  latter.  He  also 
it  was  who,  with  Ranulph  de  Glanville  and  Bernard 
de  Balieul,  defeated  the  Scots  near  Alnwick  (20 
Henry  II.),  and  took  their  king  prisoner.  He  then 
laid  claim  to  the  barony  of  Roger  de  Mowbray, 
which  had  been  given  to  Nigel,  Roger's  father,  by 
Henry  I.,  as  above  mentioned,  and  would  therefore 
seem  to  have  been  held  by  his  father  and  forfeited 
by  his  adherence  to  Robert  Court-heuse.  A  long 
suit,  during  which  we  are  told  the  country  in  general 
favoured  Stoteville's  title,  terminated  in  a  compro- 
mise, Roger  de  Mowbray  giving  up  the  lordship  of 
Kirkby  Moorside,  with  its  appurtenances,  to  Robert 
de  Stoteville,  to  be  held  by  the  service  of  nine 
knights'  fees. 

This  Robert  de  Stoteville  founded  two  monasteries 
in  Yorkshire,  one  at  Rossedale  and  the  other  at  Keld- 
holme,  and  was  a  benefactor  to  the  monks  of  St. 
Mary's  Abbey  in  York.  He  also  gave  to  the  monks 
of  Ricvaulx  all  the  lands  between  Redham  and 

VOL.  II.  s 


258         THE  CONQUEBOB  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

Kirkby,  for  the  health  of  the  soul  of  Robert  his 
grandfather,  and  for  the  souls  of  Robert  his  father, 
and  Erneburga  his  mother,  as  also  for  the  souls  of 
Helewisa  his  wife,  and  William  his  son,  Sibilla  his 
second  wife  surviving  him. 

It  is  singular  that  although  Dugclale  has  recited  the 
provisions  of  this  charter,  and  printed  a  pedigree 
which  corresponds  with  it,  he  should  have  confounded 
the  first  Robert  with  the  second,  the  second  with  the 
third,  and  invented  a  fourth,  to  whom  he  attributes 
the  charter  to  the  Abbey  of  Rievaulx. 

There  are  other  inaccuracies  in  his  account  of  this 
family,  but  they  are  beyond  my  province  in  this 
work.  I  have  travelled  already  sufficiently  far  out 
of  the  record  in  clearing  up  the  extraordinary  confu- 
sion of  its  commencement,  which  appears  to  have 
puzzled  M.  le  Prevost  and  Mr.  Taylor. 


WILLIAM  PEVEBEL. 

The  omission  of  the  name  of  this  personage,  the 
subject  of  so  much  controversy,  by  the  author  of  the 
"  Roman  de  Rou,"  is  not  so  remarkable  as  his  silence 
respecting  Eustace,  Count  of  Boulogne,  whose  rank  in 
his  own  country,  and  the  unenviable  notoriety  he  had 
justly  or  unjustly  acquired  in  England,  would,  we 


WILLIAM  PEVEREL.  259 

•should  imagine,  render  it  impossible  for  him  to  have 
been  completely  overlooked.  Nor  does  the  appearance 
of  the  name  of  Peverel  in  the  Koll  of  Battle  Abbey, 
Duchsne's  List,  the  rhyming  catalogue,  and  those 
recently  compiled  by  Messrs,  de  Magny  and  Leopold 
Delisle,  justify  us  in  claiming  for  him,  on  their 
unsupported  and  very  questionable  authority,  the  right 
to  be  classed  amongst  the  conquerors  at  Senlac. 

At  the  same  time  we  have  no  evidence,  as  in  the 
cases  of  Roger  de  Montgomeri,  Hugh  d'Avranches, 
tind  Henry  de  Percy,  to  warrant  our  entertaining  a 
contrary  opinion.  "We  must  therefore  give  him  the 
benefit  of  the  doubt,  particularly  as  we  find  him  as 
early  as  1068  in  charge  of  the  newly-built  Castle  of 
Nottingham,  and  at  the  time  of  the  compilation  of 
Domesday  the  lord  of  one  hundred  and  sixty-two 
manors  in  England,  and  possessing  in  Nottingham 
alone  forty-eight  merchants'  or  traders'  houses,  thirteen 
knights'  houses,  and  eight  bondsmen's  cottages, 
"besides  ten  acres  of  land  granted  to  him  by  the  King 
1  to  make  an  orchard,  and  the  churches  of  St.  Mary, 
St.  Peter,  and  St.  Nicholas,  all  three  of  which  we  find 
he  gave  with  their  land,  tithe,  and  appurtenances  by 
his  charter  to  the  Priory  of  Lenton. 

Surely  his  services  must  have  been  most  important 
—his  reputation  for  valour  and  ability  well  established, 

s  2 


260         THE  CONQUEROB  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

to  have  merited  such  magnificent  rewards.  To  have 
obtained  for  him  from  the  wary  and  suspicious  Con- 
queror so  important  a  trust  as  the  custody  of  Notting- 
ham Castle — at  so  early  an  age  too — for  if  the  date  of 
his  death  in  the  register  of  St.  James's,  Northampton, 
one  of  his  foundations,  can  be  relied  on,  viz.,  5th 
kalends  of  February,  1113  (1114  according  to  our 
present  calculation),  he  could  scarcely  have  been  more 
than  four  or  five-and-twenty  at  the  time  of  his 
appointment. 

How  is  it  then  that,  previous  to  that  period,  no- 
deed  of  arms  is  recorded  of  him?  That  in  all  the 
battles  and  commotions  of  which  Normandy  was  the 
theatre  during  the  thirty  years  preceding  the  Conquest, 
the  name  of  Peverel,  if  such  a  family  existed  in  the 
duchy,  never  crops  up,  even  accidentally,  in  any  of 
the  pages  of  the  contemporary  chroniclers  1 

A  Kanulph  Peverel  also  appears  in  Domesday  as 
the  lord  of  sixty-four  manors.  Of  a  verity,  the  merits 
of  these  Peverels  must  have  been  great,  or  their 
influence  at  Court  from  some  cause  or  another 
extraordinary. 

Of  course,  if  it  were  true,  as  we  have  hitherto  been 
led  to  believe,  that  William  Peverel  was  a  natural  son 
of  William  the  Conqueror,  not  a  word  more  need  be 
wasted  on  the  subject ;  but  Mr.  Eaton,  in  his  History 


WILLIAM  PEVEEEL.  261 

of  Shropshire,  discredits  the  report,  and  Mr.  Edward 
Freeman  rejects  it  with  contempt  and  indignation  as 
the  unvouched-for  assertion  of  a  Herald  (see  vol.  i., 
p.  72). 

I  am  unfortunate  in  being  opposed  in  my  opinion 
to  two  such  great  authorities ;  but  until  they  produce 
.something  like  evidence  to  support  theirs,  I  cannot 
consent  to  surrender  my  own. 

Let  us  dispassionately  examine  the  arguments  of  the 
first  dissenter,  Mr.  Eaton,  who  in  refutation  of  the 
.assertion  says,  "  Its  improbability  arises  in  two  ways. 
It  is  inconsistent  with  the  general  character  of  Duke 
William."  To  whom  shall  we  refer  for  the  general 
•character  of  this  master  of  dissimulation,  who  so 
thoroughly  understood  and  practised  the  policy  of 
.assuming  a  virtue  if  he  had  it  not  ?  To  his  paid 
servants  and  courtly  flatterers,  Guillaume  de  Poitiers, 
his  own  chaplain,  or  Guy  of  Amiens,  his  wife's  almoner, 
who,  if  he  did  write  the  "  Carmen  de  Bello,"  I  consider 
not  worthy  to  be  believed  on  his  oath  \  These  are  the 
only  actual  contemporaries  who  could  have  informed 
us  what  was  the  Duke's  general  character  for  morality 
in  Normandy  in  his  own  time,  and  they  have  not 
thought  it  worth  while  to  do  so. 

William  of  Malmesbury,  a  writer  of  the  reign  of 
Henry  II.,  is  the  first  and  only  one  in  the  twelfth 


262         THE  CONQUEROR  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

century*  who  praises  him  for  the  exercise  of  that 
single  virtue  that  has  been  so  ostentatiously  paraded 
by  his  later  panegyrists  or  apologists,  and  even  he  at 
the  same  time  acknowledges  that  "  there  were  not- 
wanting  persons  who  prated  of  matters"  irreconcilable 
with  such  a  reputation.  I  am  therefore  at  a  loss  to» 
discover  "  the  general  character  of  Duke  William "" 
which  is  the  foundation  of  one  of  Mr.  Eaton's  argu- 
ments. 

The  other  is  easier  to  deal  with,  because  it  consists- 
of  matters  of  fact,  not  merely  matters  of  opinion. 
"  Moreover,"  he  continues,  "  this  alleged  liaison  with  a, 
Saxon  lady  of  rank  can  have  originated  in  no  earlier 
circumstance  than  the  event  of  the  Duke's  visit  to  the 
Court  of  Edward  the  Confessor  in  1051.  However,. 
William  Peverel  must  have  been  born  before  that 
period,  for  he  was  old  enough  in  1068  to  be  intrusted 
with  one  of  the  most  responsible  affairs  in  the  kingdom 
— the  custody  of  the  castle  and  province  from  which, 
he  took  his  name." 

The  possibility  never  seems  to  have  occurred  to  Mr. 
Eaton,  that  the  Saxon  lady  of  rank  might  have  visited 
Normandy  before  1051,  a  circumstance  which  would 
remove  the  only  serious  difficulty  in  the  story.  Wil- 

*  Roger  of  Wendover  simply  copies  William  of  Malmesbury.     No- 
other  writer  alludes  to  the  subject. 


WILLIAM  PEVEREL.  263 

Ham  Peverel  was  no  doubt  of  full  age  at  the  time  of 
the  Conquest,  and  might  have  been,  as  I  have  said, 
four  or  five-and-twenty  when  appointed  to  the  govern- 
ment of  Nottingham,  and  near  upon  seventy  at  the 
time  of  his  death.  According  to  this  calculation  he 
would  have  been  born  a  year  or  so  previous  to  Duke 
William's  first  proposal  to  Matilda  of  Flanders. 

"  Mystery,"  Mr.  Eaton  admits,  "  there  certainly  is 
about  the  whole  subject,  and  the  truth  may  very 
possibly  be  buried  with  some  tale  of  courtly  scandal, 
though  not  of  the  precise  character  hitherto  pointed 
out," 

The  entire  history  of  William  Duke  of  Normandy 
up  to  the  invasion  of  England  is  involved  in  mystery, 
and  that  of  William  Peverel  might  tend  to  elucidate 
some  part  of  it. 

If  the  Duke  was  not  his  father,  as  asserted  and 
believed  as  early  at  least  as  the  time  of  Camden  and 
Glover,  who  could  not  have  been  the  originator,  as  Mr. 
Freeman  implies,  of  the  "  uncertified  and  almost 
impossible  scandal" — who  were  his  parents?  Upon 
no  occasion  docs  he  allude  even  to  them  ;  a 
most  singular  and  significant  fact.  Ho  founds  and 
endows  the  Priory  of  Lenton,  near  Nottingham,  for 
the  health  of  the  soul  of  King  William  and  Matilda 
his  wife,  King  William  Kufus,  King  Henry  I. 


264         THE  CONQUEEOE  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

and  Maud  his  consort,  as  also  for  the  souls  of  Wil- 
liam and  Maud  their  children ;  and  likewise  for  the 
health  of  his  own  soul  and  the  souls  of  Adeline  his 
wife,  William  his  son,  and  all  his  other  children.  No 
mention  of  father  or  mother,  nor  of  any  ancestors 
whatever.  He  was,  in  fact,  "nullus  films." 

And  how  came  it  that  the  young  "  nameless  ad- 
venturer," of  whom  nothing  is  previously  known,  was 
laden  with  wealth  and  honours,  and  selected  from  a 
host  of  noble,  valiant,  and  experienced  warriors  for  so 
important  a  command  ? 

And  next  his  name.  I  will  not  draw  any  inference 
from  his  baptismal  one,  though  it  certainly  does  not 
weaken  the  argument ;  but  whence  that  of  Peverel  ? 
Not  from  his  place  of  birth,  nor  lands  which  he 
possessed,  or  we  should  somewhere  find  the  Norman 
"  de  "  prefixed  to  it. 

One  story  is  that  the  daughter  of  Ingelric,  an  Anglo- 
Saxon  nobleman,  and  a  benefactor  if  not  the  founder 
of  the  collegiate  church  of  St.  Martin-le-Grand, 
London,  having  been  the  mistress  of  Duke  William 
and  the  mother  by  him  of  a  son  named  after  him, 
married  subsequently  Eanulph  Peverel,  who  accom- 
panied the  Conqueror  to  England,  and  that  not  only 
the  children  born  of  that  marriage,  but  also  the  Duke's 
son  William,  were  thenceforth  known  by  the  name  of 


WILLIAM  PEVEREL.  265 

Peverel.  The  other  version  is,  that  the  lady,  by 
Leland  called  Ingelrica,  and  by  Morant,  Maud,  was 
the  wife  of  Ranulph  Peverel  before  she  became  the 
mistress  of  the  Duke,0  whose  son  by  her  took  the  name 
of  her  husband's  family. 

One  of  these  accounts  must  of  course  be  inaccurate, 
but  both  agree  respecting  the  main  question  at  issue, 
are  equally  probable,  and  uncontradicted  by  any  cir- 
cumstantial evidence.  The  latter  version  disposes 
altogether  of  the  second  objection  of  Mr.  Eaton,  as  the 
wife  of  Ranulph  Peverel  would  naturally  have  been 
resident  in  Normandy  when  the  Duke  made  her 
acquaintance,  and  therefore  his  assumption  that  the 
liaison  could  have  originated  in  no  earlier  circumstance 
than  the  Duke's  visit  to  King  Edward  in  1051  is 
shown  to  be  erroneous,  and  in  either  case  a  much  too 
hasty  conclusion. 

History,  it  has  been  said,  repeats  itself,  and  the 
account  given  by  Dugdale  of  William's  liaison  with  the 
daughter  of  Ingelric  is  curiously  similar  to  that  of  his 
father  Robert  with  the  daughter  of  Fulbert  the  Furrier. 
The  young  prince,  scarcely  perhaps  of  age,  is  attracted 
by  the  beauty  of  a  girl  who  becomes  his  mistress,  and 
having  borne  him  a  son,  marries,  when  lie  marries,  a 
Norman  knight  by  whom  she  has  several  children. 

*  "  Cujus  erat  pellex."     C.imden,  445. 


266         THE  CONQUEROR  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

There  is  nothing  remarkable  in  such  circumstances,, 
except  their  coincidence  with  those  of  Robert  and 
Herleve,  nor  indeed  in  that,  as  they  were  of  common 
occurrence  in  Normandy,  and  tolerated,  if  not  sanc- 
tioned, as  the  custom  of  the  country.  And  what  if 
the  existence  not  only  of  a  wife  more  Danico,  but  of  a 
son  should  have  been  one  of  the  hitches  in  the  matri- 
monial arrangements  of  William  and  Matilda  of 
Flanders  ?  Several  good  reasons  might  be  adduced  to- 
show  the  bearing  of  this  case  on  the  mystery  that  still 
enshrouds  the  singular  courtship  of  the  lady  and  the 
unexplained  prohibition  of  the  Pope,  but  I  have  no- 
desire  to  multiply  theories  which  cannot  be  fairly 
supported  by  facts,  and  have  only  endeavoured  to 
show  as  briefly  as  possible  that  there  are  better 
grounds  for  believing  in  the  story  than  for  contemptu- 
ously dismissing  it.  Tradition  should  always  be  re- 
ceived with  great  caution,  but  where  not  irreconcilable 
with  dates,  nor  met  by  "  rebutting  evidence,"  it  should 
not  be  hastily  discarded  as  utterly  unworthy  of 
consideration. 

We  are  not  dealing  with  mystic  personages.  Wil- 
liam Peverel  of  Nottingham,  as  well  as  Eanulph  of 
Essex,  had  each  a  local  habitation  as  well  as  a  name. 
The  latter  was  founder  of  the  Priory  of  Hatfielcl 
Peverel,  at  the  instigation  of,  or  in  conjunction  with,. 


WILLIAM  PEVEEEL.  26T 


the  daughter  of  Ingelrie,  his  wife,  or,  as  I  believe,  his 
mother.  Weever,  who  tells  her  story  in  language  too- 
highly  coloured  for  these  pages,  says  she  died  about 
1100,  and  was  buried  there.  Her  image,  he  states, 
was  in  his  time  to  be  seen  carved  in  stone  in  one  of 
the  windows. 

What  have  we  against  all  this  corroborative  testi- 
mony ?  A  denial,  and  an  opinion  ! 

The  name  of  Peverel,  as  I  have  observed,  was  not 
derived  from  a  fief  or  a  locality.  In  a  paper  I  read 
many  years  ago  at  Nottingham,  I  pointed  out  that  Sir 
William  Pole,  in  his  Collections  for  Devonshire,  speak- 
ing of  the  branch  which  settled  in  that  county,  says 
the  name  was  Peverell  or  Piperell,  and  in  Domesday 
we  find  it  continually  spelt  "  Piperellus — Terra 
Ranulphi  Pipperelli."  This,  however,  does  not  illus- 
trate its  derivation,  and  the  detestable  practice  of 
latinising  proper  names  only  tends  to  confuse  and 
mislead  us,  as  they  become  in  turn  translated  or  cor- 
rupted till  the  original  is  either  lost  or  rendered  hope- 
lessly inexplicable.  My  belief  is,  that  like  "  Mesquin," 
lesser  or  junior,  translated  into  Mischinus,  and  dis- 
torted into  De  Micenis,  Peverel  is  the  Norman  form  of 
Peuerellus,  as  we  find  it  written  in  the  Anglo-Norman 
Pipe  and  Plea  Kolls.  The  u  being  pronounced  v  in 
Normandy,  and  Peuerellus  being  simply  a  misspelling. 


S38         THE  CONQUEROK  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

of  the  Latin  Puerulus,  a  boy  or  child,  naturally  applied 
to    the    son   to    distinguish    him    from    his    father. 
William  Peverel  was  therefore,  literally,  boy  or  child' 
William. 

We  see  in  the  instance  of  the  descendants  of  Richard 
-d'Avranches  how  "  Mesquin,"  used  to  distinguish 
a  younger  son,  became  the  name  of  a  family,  and  so  I 
take  it  to  have  been  with  Peverel,  which,  originally 
.applied  to  William,  was  afterwards  borne  by  so  many 
of  his  relations  in  England. 

The  Eanulph  Peverel  of  Domesday  I  believe  to 
have  been  William's  half-brother.  At  any  rate,  he 
could  scarcely  have  been  the  Ranulph  who  married 
the  daughter  of  Ingelric,  for  we  find  his  eldest  son 
Hamnio,  or  Hammond,  a  man  grown,  settled  in  England 
a  few  years  after  the  Conquest,  and  one  of  the  chief 
tenants  or  barons  of  Roger  de  Montgomeri,  Earl  of 
Shrewsbury.  He  is  also  reported  to  have  had  two 
other  sons,  Payne  Peverel  of .  Brune,  and  William 
Peverel  of  Dover ;  but  I  have  no  business  with 
these  in  this  place,  and  I  fear  I  may  have  already 
•wearied  the  reader  with  my  attempt  to  affiliate 
William  the  child  and  controvert  the  recently  formed 
opinion  of  the  immaculate  morality  of  William  the 
father,  which,  notwithstanding  they  must  have  been 
.all  acquainted  with  the  passage  in  Malmesbury,  was 


WILLIAM  PEVEEEL. 


not  entertained  by  Camden,  Glover,  Dugdale,  Sand- 
ford,,  Weever,  Thoroton,  Deering,  Morant,  nor  any 
genealogist  or  historian  as  far  as  I  can  remember  to  the 
middle  of  the  present  century,  the  erudite  translator 
of  Orderic,  Mr.  Thomas  Forester,  in  1853,  unhesitat- 
ingly speaking  of  William  Peverel  of  Nottingham  as 
"the  son  of  William  the  Conqueror,"  and  "half- 
brother  "  of  William  Peverel  of  Dover. 

I  have  no  doubt  in  my  own  mind  that  the  son  of 
Robert  and  Herleve  "had  at  least  three  natural  chil- 
dren, and  should  not  be  surprised  if  the  mysterious 
Matilda  of  Domesday  should  prove  to  be  a  fourth. 

The  wife  of  AVilliam  Peverel  of  Nottingham  was 
Adelina  de  Lancaster,  but  her  parentage  is  not  ascer- 
tained. From  her  surname  she  may  be  supposed  to 
have  been  the  daughter  of  Roger  de  Poitou,  son  of 
Roger  de  Montgomeri,  Earl  of  Shrewsbury,  who  was 
sometimes  called  Earl  of  Lancaster,  in  consequence 
of  the  large  possessions  in  that  county  which  he 
obtained  with  his  wife,  or  perhaps  one  of.  the 
family  of  those  Barons  of  Kendal  of  whom  William  of 
Lancaster  was  a  wealthy  and  powerful  person  in  the 
reigns  of  Henry  I.,  Stephen,  and  Henry  II.,  but  we 
have  nothing  beyond  the  name  to  guide  us. 

This  lady  appears  to  have  borne  to  her  husband 
two  sons,  each  named  William,  the  elder  dying  in  his 


272         THE  CONQUEROK  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

by  any  one,  I  have  already  called  attention  to  in  the 
first  volume  of  this  work,  but  subsequent  inquiry 
having  strengthened  my  suspicions,  and  the  question 
being  raised  by  me  for  the  first  time,  I  cannot  con- 
clude this  memoir  without  placing  my  facts  before  the 
dispassionate  reader,  leaving  him  to  draw  his  own 
conclusions  from  them  as  I  have  done. 

Here  is  the  extract  from  the  charter  as  printed  by 
Olivarius,  verbatim  et  literatim. 

11  In  nomine,  &c.,  Ego  Willielmus  divina  dispen- 
sante  misericordia,  Eex  Anglorum  &  Due  Nor- 
manorum,  &c.  Anno  Dominica  Incarnationis  MLXXXI 
scripta  est  hsec  charta  &  ab  excellentiorabus  regni 
personis  testicata  &  confirmata,  in  nomine  Dm 
feliciter,  Amen.  Ego  WILLIELMUS  Dei  gratia  Anglo- 
rum  Eex  hoc  prseceptum  possi  scribere  &  scriptum 
signo  Dominica  Crucis  confirmando  impressi  >fc.  Ego 
MATHILDIS  confirmavi  >J«.  Ego  Lanfrancus  Arehae- 
pisc  >J«.  Ego  THOMAS  Archiepiscopus  Kegis  filius  *fc. 
Ego  Eogerius  comes.  Ego  Hugo  comes.  Ego  Alanus 
comes.  Ego  EODBERTUS  comes.  Ego  Eustatius 
comes  >fc.  WILLIELMUS  Eegis  filius  >J<.  Willielmus 
filius  Osbert^.  Walter  de  Gaud  *."  (Arch.  S. 
Pet.  Gand.) 

Observe   that  the  name  of  Thomas  is   printed  in 
capital  letters,  as  arc  those  of  alJ  the  royal  family, 


WILLIAM  PEVEREL.  273 


while  those  of  the  Primate  Lanfranc,  the  great  Earls 
of  Shrewsbury,  Chester,  Richmond,  and  Boulogne  are 
in  ordinary  type. 

What  the  distinction  may  have  been  in  the  charter 
itself,  I  cannot  presume  to  say ;  but  there  can  be  no 
doubt  there  was  a  distinction  of  equal  importance,  or 
it  would  not  have  been  thus  indicated  by  Olivarius 
rendering  the  words  "Regis  films"  still  more  signifi- 
cant. Another  remarkable  circumstance  is  the  occur- 
rence of  the  name  of  a  William,  the  son  of  Osbert, 
amongst  the  witnesses.  The  names  of  the  parents  of 
Archbishop  Thomas  are  said  to  have  been  Osbert  and 
Muriel,  on  the  authority  of  some  entries  made  from 
time  to  time  in  the  blank  spaces  left  in  a  calendar 
printed  in  an  appendix  to  the  Surtees  Edition  of  the 
Liber  Vitne  Duuelm.,  from  a  MS.  marked  B  iv,  24, 
which  belongs  to  the  Dean  and  Chapter  of  Durham. 
"Februarius  V.  Kal.  Mar.  0'  (biit)  Osbertus  Pater 
domini  Archiepiscopi  Thomse." 

"Jimius  V.  Id.  0'  Muriel,  Mater  Domini  Archie- 
piscopi Thomse."  No  year  stated. 

These  entries  are  assumed  to  apply  to  Thomas  of 
Bayeux,  the  successor  of  Aldred,  1070 — 1100;  but 
what  proof  is  there  that  they  do  not  refer  to  his 
nephew  Thomas,  Provost  of  Beverley,  and  Bishop- 
elect  of  London,  who  before  consecration  thereto  was 
promoted  to  York,  A.D.  1109,  and  who  has  been  occa- 

VOL.  If.  T 


272         THE  CONQUEROR  ANL  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

by  any  one,  I  have  already  called  attention  to  in  the 
first  volume  of  this  work,  but  subsequent  inquiry 
having  strengthened  my  suspicions,  and  the  question 
being  raised  by  me  for  the  first  time,  I  cannot  con- 
clude this  memoir  without  placing  my  facts  before  the- 
dispassionate  reader,  leaving  him  to  draw  his  own. 
conclusions  from  them  as  I  have  done.  ' 

Here  is  the  extract  from,  the  charter  as  printed  by 
Olivarius,  verbatim  et  literatim. 

"  In  nomine,  &c.,  Ego  Willielmus  divina  dispen- 
sante  misericordia,  Rex  Anglorum  &  Due  Nor- 
manorum,  &c.  Anno  Dominica  Incarnationis  MLXXXI 
scripta  est  haec  charta  &  ab  excellentiorabus  regni 
personis  testicata  &  confirmata,  in  nomine  DnT 
feliciter,  Amen.  Ego  WILLIELMUS  Dei  gratia  Anglo- 
rum  Rex  hoc  prseceptum  possi  scribere  &  scriptum 
signo  Dominica  Crucis  confirmando  impressi  >J<.  Ego 
MATHILDIS  confirmavi  >J«.  Ego  Lanfrancus  Archae- 
pisc  >J<.  Ego  THOMAS  Archiepiscopus  Regis  filius  ^ 
Ego  Rogerius  comes.  Ego  Hugo  comes.  Ego  Alanus 
comes.  Ego  RODBEETUS  comes.  Ego  Eustatius 
comes  »i*.  WILLIELMUS  Regis  filius  ^.  Wilh'elmus 
filius  Osbert^.  Walter  de  Gand  ^."  (Arch.  S. 
Pet.  Gand.) 

Observe   that  the  name  of  Thomas  is   printed  in. 
capital  letters,  as  arc  those  of  alJ  the  royal  family, 


WILLIAM  PEVEREL.  273 


while  those  of  the  Primate  Lanfranc,  the  great  Earls 
of  Shrewsbury,  Chester,  Richmond,  and  Boulogne  are 
in  ordinary  type. 

What  the  distinction  may  have  been  in  the  charter 
itself,  I  cannot  presume  to  say ;  but  there  can  be  no 
doubt  there  was  a  distinction  of  equal  importance,  or 
it  would  not  have  been  thus  indicated  by  Olivarius 
rendering-  the  words  "Regis  filius"  still  more  signifi- 
cant. Another  remarkable  circumstance  is  the  occur- 
rence of  the  name  of  a  William,  the  son  of  Osbert, 
amongst  the  witnesses.  The  names  of  the  parents  of 
Archbishop  Thomas  are  said  to  have  been  Osbert  and 
Muriel,  on  the  authority  of  some  entries  made  from 
time  to  time  in  the  blank  spaces  left  in  a  calendar 
printed  in  an  appendix  to  the  Surtees  Edition  of  the 
Liber  Vitue  Dunelm.,  from  a  MS.  marked  B  iv,  24, 
which  belongs  to  the  Dean  and  Chapter  of  Durham. 
"Februarius  V.  Kal.  Mar.  0'  (biit)  Osbertus  Pater 
domini  Archiepiscopi  Thomae." 

"Junius  V.  Id.  0'  Muriel,  Mater  Domini  Archie- 
piscopi Thomse."  No  year  stated. 

These  entries  are  assumed  to  apply  to  Thomas  of 
Bayeux,  the  successor  of  Aldred,  1070 — 1100;  but 
what  proof  is  there  that  they  do  not  refer  to  his 
nephew  Thomas,  Provost  of  Beverley,  and  Bishop- 
elect  of  London,  who  before  consecration  thereto  was 
promoted  to  York,  A.D.  1109,  and  who  has  been  occa- 

VOL.  ir.  x 


274         THE   CONQUEROR  AND  HIS   COMPANIONS. 

sionaJly  confounded  with  his  uncle  of  the  same  name 
and  position  ?  Be  this  as  it  may,  we  have  in  the 
above  charter  evidence  of  a  William  Fitz  Osbert  living 
in  1081,  and  subscribing  a  document  in  company  with 
the  Archbishop  Thomas,  who  calls  himself  "Regis 
filius,"  though  asserted  by  Brompton  to  be  the  son  of 
a  priest,  "  Namque  presbyteri  fuit  filius." 

Thomas  of  Bayeux  had  a  brother  named  Samson, 
who  was  sent  with  him  to  Liege  by  Bishop  Odo  for 
his  education.  He  was  ordained  a  priest  by  Anselm, 
Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  14th  June,  1096,  at  Lam- 
beth, and  consecrated  Bishop  of  Worcester  at  St.  Paul's 
Cathedral  the  next  day !  What  influence  could  pos- 
sibly have  been  at  work  to  elevate  and  enrich  in  so 
remarkable  a  manner  the  sons  of  an  obscure  eccle- 
siastic, the  married  or  unmarried  priest  Osbert  ? 

Of  course,  as  in  the  instance  of  Peverel,  if  Thomas 
was  the  son  of  William  Duke  of  Normandy  and  King 
of  England,  the  answer  is  obvious. 

Well,  the  fortunate  Thomas  1st  had  an  equally  for- 
tunate nephew,  Archbishop  Thomas  2nd.  Was  he 
the  son  of  Bishop  Samson,  or  was  he  or  not  related  to 
the  William  the  son  of  Osbert  who  witnessed  the 
Charter  of  William  the  Conqueror  in  company  with 
Archbishop  Thomas  "  Regis  filius  "  ? 

The  career  of  this  Thomas  of  Bayeux  and  William 
Peverel  are  singularly  similar.  Each,  without  previous 


WILLIAM  PEVEREL.  275 

distinction,  was  suddenly  raised  to  rank  and  power  on 
the  first  opportunity.  Nothing  is  positively  known  of 
their  parentage.  Tradition,  uncontradicted  by  facts, 
asserts  Peverel  to  have  been  a  son  of  King  William, 
and  Thomas  declares  himself  another. 

If  the  entry  in  the  Calendar  really  refers  to  him, 
and  Muriel  was  his  mother,  and  not  his  sister-in-law, 
she  could  only  have  been  the  "  compagne  "  of  Osbert, 
as  the  marriage  of  priests  was  prohibited  by  the  Synod 
of  Lisieux  and  Eouen,  and  she  therefore  holds  no 
higher  position  than  Ingelric. 

The  story  of  Peverel  could  not  have  been  the  in- 
vention of  an  enemy,  as  in  the  eleventh  century  no 
shame  was  attached  to  such  illicit  connections.  From 
Rolf  the  Dane  to  Robert  the  Devil,  every  ancestor  of 
the  Conqueror  had  left  illegitimate  issue,  and  there- 
fore in  the  summary  of  his  crimes  and  vices  no  con- 
temporary would  have  dreamed  of  including  inconti- 
nence. That  neither  Glover  nor  Camden  ever  ques- 
tioned the  fact,  is  to  me  sufficient  evidence  that  they 
had  satisfied  themselves  as  to  the  authenticity  of  the 
information  on  which  they  had  asserted  it.  They  may 
have  been  deceived,  but  they  did  not  invent  the  story, 
in  which  there  is  nothing  incredible,  and  if  false,  lias 
yet  to  be  traced  to  its  origin  before  we  are  justified  in 
rejecting  it. 

T  2 


CHAPTER   XL 

4 

OF  the  following  personages  but  few  can  be 
identified,  and  of  those  few  no  materials  have  been 
found  hitherto  for  the  briefest  biographical  notice. 

To  the  meagre  information  and  vague  speculations 
of  Messrs,  le  Prevost  and  Edgar  Taylor  I  have 
added  in  some  instances  a  fact,  and  in  others  a  sug- 
gestion ;  and  generally  upheld  the  authority  of  Wace 
where  it  could  not  be  shaken  by  direct  evidence.  I 
have  already  given  my  reasons  for  the  confidence  I 
place  in  his  testimony,  and  feel  assured  that  subse- 
quent researches  will  justify  my  opinion  of  him. 

The  honest  Prebend  of  Bayeux,  at  the  conclusion 
of  what  may  be  fairly  called  his  "Roll,"  candidly 
acknowledges,  "  Many  other  barons  there  were  whom 
I  have  not  even  named,  for  I  cannot  give  an  account 
of  them  all,  nor  can  I  tell  of  all  the  feats  they  did,  for 
I  would  not  be  tedious.  Neither  can  I  give  the 
names  of  all  the  barons,  nor  the  surnames  of  all 
whom  the  Duke  brought  from  Normandy  and  Brittany 
in  his  company."  Those,  however,  whom  he  has 


WIESTACE  DE  ABEVILE.  277 


named  he  had,  I  firmly  believe,  good  authority  for 
naming,  and  with  one  important  exception  (the  pre- 
sence of  Roger  de  Montgomeri  at  Senlac),  which  is 
yet  an  open  question,  I  have  seen  no  reason  to  doubt 
his  accuracy,  or  to  endorse  the  opinion,  that  in 
specifying  the  baptismal  names  of  the  early  Norman 
barons  he  has  "often  erred."  He  was  much  more 
likely  to  be  right  than  his  commentators  in  the  nine- 
teenth century,  who,  unless  they  can  prove  distinctly 
that  no  member  of  the  family  bore  such  a  baptismal 
appellation  in  October,  1066,  are  not  justified,  except 
by  the  production  of  the  most  conclusive  evidence,  in 
asserting  that  he  was  not  also  a  companion  of  the 
Conqueror. 

The  recently  published  lists  of  Messrs,  de  Magny 
and  Delisle,  while  supplying  some  hundreds  of  names, 
are  unfortunately  unaccompanied  by  the  evidence  on 
which  they  have  been  recorded,  and  consequently 
cannot  be  confidently  quoted  either  in  corroborate  on 
or  in  contradiction  of  the  older  catalogues,  varying 
as  they  do  from  them  in  many  important  instances, 
and  occasionally  from  each  other. 

ABEVILE,  Wiestace  dc,  1.  13,562. — M.  le  PreVost 
merely  remarks  that  there  is  a  commune  so  named  in 
the  arrondissemcnt  of  Lisieux,  but  that  he  thinks  it 
more  probable  that  Abbeville,  the  well-known  city  in 


278         THE  CONQUEROR  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

Ponthieu,  is  the  locality  indicated.  I  have  mentioned 
in  my  memoir  of  Eustace,  Count  of  Boulogne,  the 
fact  that  both  the  Counts  of  Ponthieu  and  the  Counts 
of  Boulogne  were  occasionally  called  "  of  Abbeville." 
But  strange  as  it  appears  that  so  remarkable  a  person 
as  Eustace  II.  should  have  been  altogether  omitted 
by  Wace,  which  he  certainly  has  been  if  not  alluded 
to  as  above,  there  is  nothing  to  enable  us  to  identify 
him  with  the  unknown  companion  of  the  Conqueror 
recorded  by  the  Prebend  of  Bayeux.  He  would  surely 
have  written  "  Li  quens  Wiestace  de  Abevile "  had 
he  intended  to  speak  of  Count  Eustace.  Who  then 
was  this  Wiestace  ?  No  one  of  the  name  of  Abbe- 
ville appears  in  Domesday.  An  obscure  adventurer — 
a  soldier  of  fortune,  perhaps  killed  in  the  battle — 
would  scarcely  have  been  classed  with  the  Cham- 
berlain of  Tankerville,  the  Lord  of  Mandeville,  and 
William  Crispin,  or  even  mentioned  at  all  by  the 
Norman  poet  for  the  sake  of  the  rhyme,  unless  he 
had  distinguished  himself  in  the  conflict,  or  in  some 
way  made  the  name  of  Eustace  of  Abbeville  familiar 
to  his  countrymen. 

I  am  strongly  under  the  impression  that  for  Abbe- 
ville we  should  read  Appeville,  of  which  name  there 
was  more  than  one  Norman  family  of  note  in  the 
eleventh,  twelfth,  and  thirteenth  centuries. 


WIESTACE   DE  ABEVILE.  279 

Three  parishes  so  named  are  to  be  found  in  Nor- 
mandy :  1.  Appeville,  canton  of  Montfort-sur-Risle, 
arrondissement  of  Pontaudemer ;  2.  Appeville-le- 
Petit,  canton  of  Affranville,  arrondissement  of  Dieppe; 
3.  Appeville-la-Haye,  canton  of  Haye-du-Puits,  arron- 
dissement of  Coutances.  The  lords  of  Montfort-sur- 
Kisle  were  also  seigneurs  of  Appeyille,  and  several  of 
their  charters  are  subscribed  by  persons  of  that  name, 
as  arc  also  some  charters  of  the  Counts  of  Meulent, 
sires  de  Pontaudemer.  Gosce  d'Appeville  witnesses 
the  gift  of  the  hermitage  of  Brotone  to  the  Abbey  of 
Preaux,  by  Robert,  Comte  de  Meulent,  circa  11G3. 
Appcville-le-Petit  furnishes  us  with  no  indications ; 
but  Appeville-la-Haye  was  no  doubt  the  cradle  of  a 
family  so  named.  Our  former  acquaintance,  Turstain 
Haldub,  lord  of  Haye-du-Puits  at  the  time  of  the 
Conquest,  was  also  Seigneur  d'Appeville;  and  from 
the  foundation  charter  of  the  Abbey  of  Lessay  we 
learn  that  lie,  with  his  son  Eudo  al  Chapel,  gave  to 
that  abbey  all  the  churches,  lands,  woods,  and  meadows 
in  Apavil  and  Osulfvill,  "  et  aliis  maisnillis  quse  ad 
Apavillam  pertinebant."  Observe  that  Appeville  is 
here  spelt  with  one  p,  as  Abbeville  in  the  "  Roman 
de  Rou "  is  with  one  Z>.  A  very  slight  slip  of  the 
pen  may  have  caused  all  the  confusion. 

Still  stronger  presumptive  evidence  is  afforded  us 


280         THE  CONQUEKOR  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 


by  Domesday.  Walterus  de  Appevillc  is  therein 
recorded  as  holding,  tinder  William  de  Arcis,  the 
manor  of  Folkestone,  in  the  hundred  of  that  name. 

We  have  here  distinct  proof  that  an  Appevillc 
had  established  himself  in  England  before  1085,  and 
may  fairly  draw  from  it  the  inference,  that  either 
Walter  himself  or  one  of  his  family  was  a  companion 
of  the  Conqueror  in  1066.  MM.  de  Magny  and 
Delisle  have  Gauticr  (Walter)  d'Appeviile,  but  no 
Eustace.  The  name  of  Abbeville  occurs  in  the  Roll 
of  Battle  Abbey,  but  that  is  no  evidence. 

ASNEBEC  (Onebac),  "cil  d',"  1.  13,748. — Asnebec  is 
a  commune  in  the  neighbourhood  of  Voie.  M.  le 
Prevost  doubts  that  it  was  a  seigneurie  at  the  time 
of  the  Conquest,  and  believes  it  to  have  belonged  to 
Kobert,  the  younger  son  of  Hamon-aux-Dents,  the 
rebel  lord  of  Thorigny  killed  at  Val-es-Dunes  in  1047. 
That  Robert  succeeded  his  father  in  the  lordship  of 
Thorigny,  as  Le  Prevost  implies,  is  very  proble- 
matical ;  but  he  may  have  been  Sire  d'Asnebec,  and 
as  such  recognized  in  1066,  if  he  were  in  the  in- 
vading army,  which  must  first  be  ascertained.  If  not, 
"He  of  Onebec"  remains  for  the  present  unidenti- 
fied. 

ASNIERES,  "  Gilbert  le  Yield'/'  1.  13,663.—  Asnieres, 
a  commune  in  the  arrondissement  of  Bayeux.  A  Raoul 


AUYILLIERS.  £81 


cTAsnieres  witnesses  a  charter  to  the  Abbey-aux- 
Damcs,  at  Caen,  in  1082 ;  but  there  is  no  trace  of  a 
Gilbert,  nor  mention  of  any  of  the  family,  in  Domes- 
day ;  neither  do  I  find  it  in  any  form  in  the  Kolls  or 
lists  of  "the  Conquerors5'  that  have  come  down  to 
us.  Mr.  Edgar  Taylor,  however,  has  noticed  that  in 
the  Bayeux  Inquest  the  Maulevriers,  a  well-known 
Anglo-Norman  family,  are  found  to  hold  half  a 
knight's  fee  in  Asnicres,  the  only  connection  of  it 
with  this  country  yet  discovered. 

AUVILLIERS,  "Sire  d',"  1.  13,747. — There  are  two 
communes  of  this  name,  one  near  Pont-1'Eveque, 
and  the  other  near  Mortemer-sur-Eaulne.  As  the 
"  Sire  d'Auvillers  "  is  described  by  Wace  as  charging 
in  company  with  Hugh  de  Mortemer,  it  is  probable 
he  hailed  from  the  latter,  and  was  a  vassal  of  the 
Mortemers.  A  Hugh  de  Aviler  was  a  vassal  of 
Eobert  Malet,  in  Suffolk,  in  the  days  of  the  Con- 
queror, and  a  benefactor  to  the  Priory  of  Eye,  founded 
by  him ;  but  there  is  nothing  to  show  who  was  the 
Sire  d'Auvilliers  who  fought  at  Senlac. 

BERTRAX,  "  de  Peleit  le  filz,"  1.  11,510.— A  Breton 
who  joined  the  army  of  invasion  at  St.  Valery,  in 
company  with  the  Sire  de  Dinan,  Raoul  de  Gael,  and 
many  others  of  his  countrymen.  Nothing  more 
appears  to  be  known  of  him  by  any  one;  and  "do 


282         THE  CONQUEROR  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

Peleit  Ic  filz  Bertran"  may  be  interpreted  either  as 
Bertrancl  the  son  of  Peleit,  or  de  Peleit  the  son  of 
Bertrand,  or  Fitz-Bertrand  de  Peleit ! 

BRIENCORT,  "le  Sire  de/'  1.  13,773. — No  such  place 
known  in  Normandy.  Supposed  by  Le  Prevost  to 
be  intended  for  Brucourt,  arrondissement  of  Pont- 
1'EvCque.  A  Robert  de  Brucourt  confirmed  grants 
by  Geffry  de  Fervaques  to  Walsingham,  the  only 
instance  of  the  connection  of  the  name  with  English 
affairs. 

BOSXEBOSQ,  "leSircde,"  1.  13,GG7.— From  Bonnc- 
bosq,  arrondissement  of  Pont-1'EvCque.  No  identifi- 
cation or  connection  with  England. 

BOTEVILAIN,  1.  13,711. — A  Sire  de  Bouttevilc,  arron- 
dissement of  Valognes,  is  certified  by  Mous.  de 
Gerville  to  have  been  in  the  expedition.  The  name 
occurs  in  the  Roll  of  Battle  Abbey,  and  the  family 
established  itself  in  the  counties  of  Somerset  and 
Bedford.  At  the  same  time  a  family  named  Boutte- 
villain  is  found  seated  in  Northamptonshire,  in  which 
county  a  Guillaume  Boutevileyn  founded,  in  1143, 
the  Abbey  of  Pipewell.  This  name  appears  in 
Brompton's  List ;  but  whether  the  Boutevilles  and 
the  Bouttevillains  were  one  and  the  same  family  is 
left  to  conjecture,  as  well  as  who  were  the  actual 
companions  of  the  Conqueror.  The  Thynnes,  Mar- 


EGBERT  DE  BELFOU.  283 

quises    of    Bath,    claim    descent    from    Botevillc   of 
Shelton,  county  of  Salop.""' 

BELFOU,  "  Robert  le  Sire  de,"  1.  13,558. — Here  we 
have  a  baptismal  name  to  assist  us,  and  as  Guillaumc 
de  Poitiers  also  calls  him  Robert,  I  adopt  it,  merely 
observing  that  Le  Prevost  states  he  is  called  Ralf  in 
some  contemporary  documents,  and  that  we  find  a 
Radulph  de  Bellofago  in  Domesday.  The  modern 
lists  have  Raoul  and  William. 

Beaufou,  Beaufoi,  or  Belfai,  latinised  Bellofagus,  is 
ill  the  neighbourhood  of  Pont-rEveque.  Its  lords 
were  descended  in  female  line  from  Ralph,  Comte 
d'lvri,  uterine  brother  of  Duke  Richard  I.,  already 
mentioned  (page  220,  ante) ;  and  Sir  Henry  Ellis, 
in  his  "Introduction  to  Domesday,"  suggests  that 
the  Radulplms  of  that  book  was  a  near  relation,  if 
not  a  son,  of  William  dc  Beaufoe,  Bishop  of  Thetford, 
Chaplain  and  Chancellor  of  the  Conqueror.  I  con- 
sider him  more  likely  to  have  been  the  son  of  Robert, 
the  combatant  of  Senlac,  and  nephew  of  William  the 
Bishop.  No  particulars  are  known  of  either,  and 
except  through  females  no  descendants  are  traceable 
in  England. 

CAILLY,  "Sirede,"  1.  13,649. — Cailly  is  in  the  arron- 
dissement  of  Rouen,  and  there  can  be  no  doubt  that 

*  Xot  one  of  the  last  seven  names  occurs  in  the  modem  catalogues. 


k84         THE  CONQUEROR  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

one  or  more  of  the  family  may  have  been  in  the 
expedition.  Osbern  de  Cailly  was  apparently  the 
holder  of  the  fief  in  10GG,  as  his  son  Roger  made  a 
donation  to  St.  Ouen  in  1080.  A  "William  de  Cailgi 
also  appears  in  Domesday.  Although  by  alliances 
with  the  Giffards  and  the  Tateshalls  they  became  of 
importance  in  England,  the  companion  of  the  Con- 
queror has  afforded  no  materials  for  a  memoir.  By 
the  death  of  Thomas  de  Cailly,  Baron  of  Buckenham 
(10th  Edw.  II.),  without  issue,  the  property  passed, 
through  his  sister  and  heir  Margaret,  to  the  family  of 
Clifton. 

CARTE  AT,  "Onfroi  and  Mangier,  "1. 13,584. — Carteret, 
in  the  arrondissement  of  Valognes,  imparted  its  name 
to  this  family,  from  a  branch  of  which,  settled  in 
Jersey,  the  Barons  Cartcret,  and  from  the  sisters  and 
co-heirs  of  Robert,  second  Earl  Granville,  Viscount 
and  Baron  Carteret,  who  died  without  issue  in  1776, 
descend  the  present  Marquises  of  Bath  and  Tweeddale, 
and  the  Earls  Dysart  and  Cowper.  Of  Humphrey 
and  Mangier,  the  companions  of  the  Conqueror,  no- 
thing is  known  but  their  names.  That  of  Roger  is 
added  by  the  modern  compilers.  Regnaud  de  Car- 
teret, son  of  an  earlier  Humphrey,  accompanied  Duke 
Robert  the  Magnificent  to  the  Holy  Land  in  1035. 

CFIAIGNES,  "le  Sire  de,"  1. 1 3,664. — LePrevost  derives 


LA  FERTE.  283 

this  family  from  Cab  agues,  in  the  arrondisscment  de 
Bayeux,  the  lords  of  which  were  benefactors  to  the 
abbey  of  Grestein,  in  Normandy,  and  the  priory  of 
Lewes,  in  Sussex.  The  name  also  appears  in  Domes- 
day, and  with  the  addition  of  Guillaume  in  the 
modern  lists. 

COMBRAI,  "  cil  de,"  1. 13,775. — Combrai  is  near  Har- 
court  Thury,  arrondissement  of  Falaise.  We  have  no 
particulars  respecting  its  earlier  lords,  nor  any  indica- 
tion which  of  them  was  in  the  battle.  The  modern 
lists  have  Geoffrey. 

EPIN£,  "  cil  de,"  1.  13,613. — All  speculation  even  on 
who  is  indicated  by  this  personage  would  be  idle  under 
present  circumstances.  There  are  numerous  fiefs  and 
communes  so  called,  and  unless,  as  M.  le  Prevost 
observes,  we  are  to  consider  the  name  was  latinized 
into  De  Spincto,  we  have  no  trace  of  the  family  in 
England. 

FERTE.  "li  Sire  de  la,"  1.  13,707.— The  authors  of 
"  Recherches  sur  le  Domesday "  have  set  at  rest  all 
doubts  respecting  this  personage  and  the  locality  from 
which  he  derived  his  name.  Under  the  head  of 
ACHARDUS  they  state  incidentally  that,  in  1066, 
Achard  d'Ambrieres,  Henri  de  Domfront,  and  Mathcw 
de  la  Fet-te  Mace  brought  eighty  men-at-arms  from  le 
Passais-Nonnand  to  join  the  forces  assembled  by  Duke 


280         THE  COXQUEBOR  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 


William  for  tlic  conquest  of  England.  We  have  here, 
therefore,  the  names  of  two  other  companions  of  the 
Conqueror,  neither  of  whom  is  mentioned  by  M.  de 
Magny  or  Delisle ;  William  de  la  Fertc,  who  with 
Turgis  de  Tracic  were  governors  of  Maine  in  1073, 
was  perhaps  of  the  same  family.  A  William  de  Feri- 
tate  (Ferte)  held  Weston  and  Stokes  in  Baronise  from 
the  Conquest  of  England  (Testa  dc  Neville,  p.  286). 
A  Sire  de  Ferte  Mace*,  either  Mathias  or  William, 
married  a  sister  of  Odo,  Bishop  of  Bayeux,  and  his 
son  William  is  described  as  nephew  of  that  worthy 
prelate  in  the  charter  of  an  Archbishop  of  Tours,  temp. 
St.  Louis.  What  sister  of  Odo,  and  by  which  father  ? 

GASCTE,  "  cil  de,"  1.  13,658. — Gace,  arrondissement 
of  Argentan.  It  is  not  known  who  was  Sire  de  Gace 
in  1066.  Baoul  de  Gace",  the  instigator  of  the  murder 
of  Gilbert,  Count  of  Eu,  died  childless  before  the 
Conquest,  and  his  domains  were  seized  by  Duke 
William.  The  holder  under  him  has  not  been  dis- 
covered. 

GLOS.     See  SAP. 

Goviz,  "  cil  de,"  1.  13,653. — Gouvix  is  in  the  arron- 
dissement of  Falaise,  but  no  possessor  of  it  is  known 
at  the  time  of  the  Conquest. 

JORT,  "cil  de/'  1.  13,614. — Jort  is  a  commune  near 
Courci,  arrondissement  of  Falaise.  It  had  belonged  to 


LA  MARE.  287 

Lesceline,  Countess  of  Eu,  but  no  possessor  of  it  in 
10G6  is  known  to  French  antiquaries.  It  was  pro- 
bably held  by  some  one  under  the  De  Courcis  of  that 
day,  as  they  are  named  together  "  Gil  de  Courci  e  Oil 
de  Jbrt." 

LITHAIRE,  "li  Sire  de,"  1.  13,554. — Lithaire,  com- 
mune of  Haye-du-Puits,  in  the  Cotentin.  Eudo  al 
Chapel  was  lord  of  it  in  1066  ;  but  Robert  de  Hale, 
who  married  Muriel,  daughter  and  heir  of  Eudo, 
might  have  held  under  him  (see  p.  125,  ante). 

LA  MARE,  "Sire  de,"  1.  13,555.— The  name  of  this 
great  Anglo-Norman  family  was  derived  from  the 
fief  of  La  Mare,  at  St.  Opportune,  arrondissement  of 
Pontaudemer,  where  the  castle  was  built  on  piles  on 
the  border  of  the  lake,  still  called  Grand-Mare. 
Lemare  occurs  in  the  Roll  of  Battle  Abbey  and 
Duchesne's  List,  and  De  la  Mare  in  Leland's ;  but  I 
cannot  find  a  Hugues  de  la  Mare,  as  suggested  by  Le 
Prevost,  in  any,  no  baptismal  names  being  men- 
tioned. The  modern  lists  have  Guillaume. 

MOLEI,  "le  Sire  de,"  1.  13,777.— The  family  name 
of  the  Sire  de  Molay,  or  Vieux-Molay,  in  the  eleventh 
century,  was  Bacon,  subsequently  so  illustrious  in 
England ;  and  it  is  presumed  that  a  Guillaume  Bacon, 
who  in  1082  made  donations  to  the  Abbey  of  the 
Holy  Trinity  at  Caen,  wherein  his  sister  had  taken 


288         THE   CONQUEROK  AND   HIS   COMPANIONS. 

the  veil,  is  the  Sire  de  Molai  of  the  "Roman  de  Ron." 
A  Richard  Bacon,  nephew  of  Ranulf,  Earl  of  Chester, 
founded  the  priory  of  Roncester,  county  of  Stafford. 
The  family  of  the  great  Lord  Chancellor  and  the 
premier  baronets  of  England  do  not  deduce  their 
descent  from  the  Norman  lords  of  Molay,  but  from 
Grirnbald,  a  cousin  of  William,  de  Warren,  whose 
great  grandson,  according  to  their  genealogists,  as- 
sumed the  name  of  Bacon  in  Normandy. 

MONCEALS,  "La,"  1.  13,654. — There  are  several 
communes  of  the  name  of  Monceaux  in  Normandy. 
Le  Prevost  considers  the  one  in  question  is  in  the 
neighbourhood  of  Bayeux,  and  the  seat  of  the  family 
of  Drogo  de  Monceaux,  the  second  husband  of  Edith 
de  Warren,  widow  of  Gerrard  de  Gournay.  Either 
Drogo  or  his  son  of  the  same  name  witnessed  the 
foundation  charter  of  Dun  stable,  in  the  county  of 
Bedford,  temp.  Henry  I,  and  the  name  is  of  frequent 
occurrence  in  later  documents.  Guillaume  dc  Mon- 
ceaux occurs  in  the  modern  lists. 

PACTE,  "cil  ki  ert  Sire  de,"  1.  13,655.— Paci-sur- 
Eure  was,  at  the  time  of  the  Conquest,  in  the  posses- 
sion of  William  Fitz  Osbern,  and  after  his  death,  in 
1074,  formed  a  portion  of  the  inheritance  of  William  de 
Breteuil,  his  son.  M.  le  Prevost  denounces  this  as  an 
evident  mistake,  but  some  one  may  have  held  under 


PIROIL—  PINS.  289 


Fitz  Osbern,  though  not  entitled  perhaps  to  be  called 
the  "  Sire  de  Paci." 

PIROU,  "  un  Chevalier  de,"  1.  13,557. — Pirou  is  near 
Lessai,  but  "  a  chevalier  of  Pirou  "  might  not  be  the 
lord  of  it.  It  would  be  idle  to  speculate  as  to  the 
person  alluded  to  by  the  poet.  William,  Lord  of 
Pirou,  is  said  by  Orderic  to  have  perished  in  the  fatal 
wreck  of  the  "White  Ship,"  in  1120.  In  a  later 
charter,  however,  a  "Gulielmus  de  Pirou,  Dapifer," 
appears  as  a  witness. — Mon.  Ang.  vol.  ii.,  p.  973. 

PRAERES,  "le  Sire  de,"  1. 13,661. — Even  the  locality 
of  this  seigneurie  is  undetermined,  and  when  it  is 
stated  that  a  Sire  de  Praeres  appears  about  1119  as  a 
vassal  of  the  Earl  of  Chester,  all  is  said  that  is  known 
of  the  family. 

PINS,  "  cil  ki  ert  Sire  des,"  1.  13,567,  supposed  to 
be  Pin  au  Haras,  arrondissement  of  Argentan.  A  Foul- 
ques  des  Pin  is  named  in  a  charter  to  Saint  Pierre-sur- 
Dive  as  a  contemporary  of  the  Conqueror ;  a  Morin  du 
Pin  was  Dapifer  to  Kobert,  Comte  de  Mortain,  and 
living  in  1080,  and  the  name  frequently  occurs  in. 
connection  with  events  of  the  next  century  ;  but  the 
Sire  des  Pins  of  Senlac  has  not  been  identified.  The 
family  were  seated  in  England  shortly  after  the  Con- 
quest, and  appear  to  have  been  in  the  service  of  the 
Counts  of  Meulent  (Orderic  Vital,  687,  881). 


290         THE  CONQUEROR  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

REBERCIL,  "le  Sire  de,"  1.  13,777. — Now  called 
Rubercy,  in  the  arrondissement  of  Bayeux.  The  com- 
panion of  the  Conqueror  not  known,  but  in  1168 
Hughes  Wae  (Wake),  Lord  of  Rebercil,  founded  the 
Abbey  of  Longues,  and  the  family  of  Wake  is  one  of 
the  most  important  in  Anglo-Norman  history.  How 
he  became  Lord  of  Rebercil,  whether  by  inheritance 
or  marriage,  has  yet  to  be  discovered.  His  wife  was 
Emma,  daughter  of  Baldwin  de  Gant  and  Adelaide  de 
Rullos ;  but  Hugh  could  not  have  been  born  at  the 
time  of  the  Conquest,  and  we  have  no  knowledge  of 
his  father.  No  connection  is  hinted  to  have  existed 
between  Hugh  and  the  celebrated  Hereward,  whose 
name  of  Le  Wake  is  of  dubious  derivation ;  but  the 
founding  of  the  Priory  of  Brunne  in  Lincolnshire  by 
Baldwin  de  Gant,  the  father-in-law  of  Hugh,  is  worthy 
of  observation,  taken  in  connection  with  the  story 
that  Hereward  was  a  son  of  Leofric,  Lord  of  Brunne. 
The  name  of  Wake  occurs  in  all  the  Rolls  and  cata- 
logues except  those  of  MM.  de  Magny  and  Delisle, 
and  the  Wakes  of  Clevedon,  in  the  county  of  Somerset, 
«laim  to  be  descended  from  Sir  Thomas,  called  from  his 
large  possessions  "  the  great  Wake  "  in  the  reign  of 
Edward  III. 

SAINT  CLER,  "le  Sire  de,"  1.  13,749.— Saint  Clair  is 
the  principal  town  in  the  canton  of  that  name  in  the 


ST.  MARTIN.—  ST.   SEVER.  291 

^arrondissement  of  St.  L6.  The  site  of  the  castle  was 
•still  to  be  seen  near  the  church  when  M.  de  Gerville 
wrote  his  valuable  work  on  the  castles  in  La  Manche. 
A  William  de  Saint  Clair  was  a  benefactor  to  the 
Abbey  of  Savigny  in  the  reign  of  Henry  I.,  and  one 
•of  the  same  name,  if  not  the  same  person,  founded  the 
Priory  of  Villiers  Fossard  in  1139;  but  who  "came 
over  with  the  Conqueror  "  does  not  appear.  A  Richard 
de  Sender  is  found  in  Domesday,  from  whom,  as  a 
matter  of  course,  the  English  Sinclairs  are  reported  to 
have  descended. 

ST.  MARTIN,  "le  Sire  de/'  1.  13,565. — No  identifica- 
tion either  of  place  or  person.  There  are  very  many 
St.  Martins,  and  we  know  nothing  of  their  seigneurs 
in  1066.  A  family  of  that  name  was  seated  in  Eng- 
land early  in  the  following  century,  and  a  Robert  de 
•St.  Martin  founded  the  Abbey  of  Robert's  Bridge,  in 
the  county  of  Sussex,  in  1176. 

SAINT  SEVER,  "cil  de." — Le  Prevost  doubts  the 
•existence  of  any  seigneur  of  Saint  Sever  in  1066,  that 
place  having  been  always  the  property  of  the  Viscounts 
of  the  Avranchin.  Now  "  Saint  Sever !  Sire  St. 
Sever  I "  was  the  war  cry  of  Renouf  de  Bricasard  at 
the  battle  of  Val-es-Dunes  (see  vol.  i,  p.  29),  and  his 
son  Ranulph  de  Bricasard,  called  Le  Meschin,  or  the 
younger,  afterwards  Earl  of  Chester,  would  have  pro- 

v  2 


292         THE  CONQUEEOE  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

bably  been  the  Lord  of  St.  Sever  at  the  time  of  the 
expedition  had  he  been  old  enough,  but  as  he  lived 
till  1129  that  is  not  probable.  At  all  events  the- 
learned  antiquary  is,  I  think,  mistaken.  Renouf  de 
Bricasard  was  Viscount  of  the  Bessin  in  1047,  not  of 
the  Avrauchin,  and  therefore  frequently  called  Eenouf 
de  Bayeux.  He  married  Matilda,  daughter  of  Richard 
d'Avranches,  by  Emma  de  Conteville,  and  sister  of 
Hugh,  Earl  of  Chester.  That  is  the  only  connection 
with  the  Vicomtes  d'Avranches,  which,  supposing  hint 
to  be  married  in  1047,  might  account  in  some  way 
for  his  war  cry.  We  have  no  means  of  ascertaining- 
the  age  of  either  father  or  son  in  1066  ;  but  as  Neel 
de  Saint-Sauveur,  the  other  rebellious  viscount,  was 
in  the  expedition,  the  odds  are  in  favour  of  the  elder 
son-in-law  of  that  "  Richarz  ki  fu  d'Avrancin "  (see- 
p.  16,  ante),  under  whom  he  might  have  held  St. 
Sever,  or  been  enfeoffed  with  it  in  frank  marriage  at 
the  time  of  his  union  with  his  daughter. 

SAP,  "cil  de,"l.  13,668.— Wace  couples  with  "cil 
de  Sap,"  "cil  de  Gloz,"  upon  which  Le  Prevost  re- 
marks :  "  Here  again  are  two  seigneurs  of  our  author's 
creation.  At  the  time  of  the  Conquest  Sap  had  been 
given  with  Moules  to  Baldwin  Fitz  Gilbert,  Comte  de 
Brionne,  as  we  have  already  said,  and  could  not  con- 
sequently have  a  '  seigneur  particulier.'  As  to  Gloz, 


SAP.  293 

at  belonged  to  William  de  Breteuil,  and  it  appears 
that  its  possession  dated  from  a  very  early  period, 
because  we  find  Barnon  de  Glos  in  the  service  of  his 
«( William's)  father  about  the  year  1035.  William  de 
Xjloz,  son  of  this  Barnon,  was  dapifer  to  William  de 
Breteuil,  and  assisted  probably  at  the  Conquest  in  that 
capacity."  Exactly  so,  and  therefore  why,  dear  M. 
le  Provost,  to  whom  we  are  all  so  much  indebted,  do 
you  charge  the  honest  Prebend  of  Bayeux  with  having 
created  two  "  seigneurs  "  out  of  his  imagination  ?  The 
title  is  of  your  own  bestowing.  He  does  not  style 
Ihem  seigneurs.  He  speaks  of  them  simply  as  "  cil 
<le  Sap,"  and  "  cil  de  Gloz  "  (celui),  and  the  context 
dearly  shows  that  he  does  not  rank  them  as  lords  of  a 
iief,  but  as  chevaliers  distinguished  by  their  family 
names,  who  in  later  days  in  England  would  have 
been  called  Sir  William  de  Gloz,  and  Sir  —  de 
.Sap.  Sire  not  only  signified  lord,  but  the  senior 
member  of  the  family  ("plus  vieux,  phis  ancien," 
Manage),  and  was  familiarly  applied  to  men  of 
.any  rank  ("  pauvre  sire,  honime  sans  merite,"  Lan- 
•dais).  Granting  that  Wace  may  have  occasionally 
used  it  inaccurately,  the  persistence  of  his  annotator  in 
^refusing  to  recognize  the  existence  of  the  persons  so 
designated  is,  I  humbly  submit,  a  mistake  on  his 
part. 


294         THE  CONQUEROR  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

SACIE,  "cil  de,"  1.  13,659.— M.  de  Gerville,  in  liis^ 
"  Keclierches  sur  les  Chateaux  de  la  Manche,"  has. 
pointed  out  that  the  place  here  mentioned  is  not  Sassy 
near  Falaise,  but  Sacey  near  Pont  Orson.  A  Jourdain 
de  Sacey,  chevalier,  was  living  in  the  twelfth  century, 
and  an  Emeric  de  Sacey  occurs  in  the  "  Monasticon," 
but  no  guess  has  been  made  as  to  the  actual  com- 
panion of  the  Conqueror.  I  will  venture  a  suggestion.. 
In  the  Commune  of  Sacey,  on  the  banks  of  the  Coes- 
non,  a  river  dividing  the  provinces  of  Normandy  and 
Brittany,  a  castle  was  built  in  1030  by  Eobert  Duke 
of  Normandy,  father  of  the  Conqueror,  the  site  of  which 
was,  and  may  be  still,  visible  on  a  hill  about  a  quarter 
of  a  league  from  the  bourg  of  Sassy.  This  castle,, 
indifferently  called  Charruez  and  Cheruel,  is  said  to> 
have  given  its  name  to  the  well-known  Norman  family 
of  Kyriel.  Wace  makes  no  mention  of  a  Kyriel,  but 
if  one  of  the  family  held  lands  in  the  commune  he 
might  have  been  known  as  a  Sire  de  Sassy.  Vide 
Recherches  de  M.  deGerville,  and  Sir  Bernard  Burke's- 
Koll  of  Battle  Abbey. 

SAINTEALS,  "cil  de,"  1.   13,643. — This    commune,, 
now  called  Cintheaux,  near  Gonvix,  arrondissement  de 
Falaise,  offers  no  record  of  a  possessor  in  1066.     In. 
1081   it  belonged  to  Robert  Marmion,  who  gave  the 
church  there  to  the  Abbey  of  Barbery.     One  of  that 


SEMILLEE.— SOLIGNTE.  295 

family  may  have  been  an  under-tenant  at  the  time  of 
the  Conquest. 

SEMILLIE,  "li  Sire  dc,"  1.  13,650.— A  Guillaume 
de  Semilly  (near  St.  L6)  is  a  witness  to  two  charters 
in  1082,  and  appears  to  have  been  a  person  of  some 
importance,  as  he  signs  immediately  after  Odo  Bishop 
of  Bayeux  and  Eoger  de  Montgomeri.  He  was  pro- 
bably the  "  Sire  de  Semillie"  of  Senlac.  His  daughter 
and  heiress,  Agnes,  married  Guillaume,  son  of  .Richard 
de  Hommet,  Constable  of  Normandy,  and  their  eldest 
son  Guillaume  assumed  the  family  name  of  his  mother, 
granting  as  Guillaume  de  Semilly  a  hundred  acres  of 
land  in  his  demesnes  to  the  Abbey  of  Aunay,  with  the 
consent  of  his  brothers,  Jourdain,  Bishop  of  Lisieux, 
Geoffrey  and  Enguerrand  du  Hommet  (Recherches  sur 
le  Domesday,  p.  94). 

SOLTGNIE,  "le  Sire  de,"  1.  13,602. — Subligny,  near 
Avranches.  According  to  Le  PreVost  (Corrections 
and  Additions  to  vol.  ii.),  one  of  this  family,  who 
wrote  themselves  Sulligny,  Sousligny,  and  Subligny, 
became  Bishop  of  Avranches,  and  another  took  part 
in  the  first  crusade.  A  marriage  with  the  Paniells, 
or  Paganels,  caused  the  property  of  a  branch  in 
Normandy  to  pass  into  that  family,  and  the  name  of 
Subligny  existed  in  the  counties  of  Cornwall,  Devon, 
and  Somerset  as  late  as  the  present  century.  The 


290         THE  CONQUEROR  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

companion  of  the  Conqueror,  however,  has  yet  to  be 
identified. 

TOUQUES,  "cilde,"  1.  13,555. — A  place  at  the  mouth 
of  the  river  of  that  name,  arrondissement  of  Pont- 
1'Eveque.  Mons.  le  Prevost  notices  the  appearance 
of  the  names  of  Jordan,  Koger,  Robert,  and  Henri  de 
Touques  in  Dugdale's  Monasticon ;  but  neither  he  nor 
Mr.  Edgar  Taylor  seems  to  have  been  aware  of  the 
ancient  family  of  Toke  of  Godington,  in  the  county  of 
Kent,  who  claim  descent  from  the  companion  of  the 
Conqueror.  Thoroton,  who  spells  the  name  in  seven- 
teen different  ways,  states  that  a  branch  of  this  family 
was  seated  in  Nottinghamshire  in  the  reign  of  Rufus, 
and  other  ramifications  may  be  found  in  the  counties 
of  Derby,  York,  Cambridge,  Herts,  and  Dorset.  The 
present  representative  of  the  house  is  the  Rev.  Nicholas 
Toke,  of  Godington,  near  Ashford. 

TORNEOR,  "Sire  del,"  1.  13,661.  -|  Of  the  Sire  of 
ToRNifcRES,  "Sire  de,"  1.  13,664.  J  Le  Tourneur, 
near  Vire,  or  his  comrade  the  Sire  of  .Tournieres,  arron- 
dissement of  Bayeux,  nothing  is  known  by  either  the 
French  or  the  English  annotators  of  Wace.  A  Richard 
de  Tourneriis  is  mentioned  in  the  foundation  charter  of 
Kenilworth,  temp.  Henry  I.,  and  the  Earl  of  Win- 
terton  claims  to  be  descended  from  a  Sire  de  Tour- 
nour  who  came  over  with  the  Conqueror. 


TBACEE.  297 

TRACIE,  "Sire  de,"  1.  13,605.— The  Norman  family 
of  Tracy  does  not  appear  to  have  been  of  much  im- 
portance in  England  before  the  reign  of  Stephen,  who 
bestowed  upon  Henry  de  Tracy  the  honour  of  Ben- 
stable  (Barnstaple)  in  Devonshire  ;  but  the  first  of  the 
name  we  hear  of  is  Turgis,  or  Turgisins  de  Tracy,  who 
with  William  de  la  Ferte  was  defeated  and  driven  out 
of  Maine  by  Fulk  le  Rechin,  Count  of  Anjou,  in  1073, 
and  who  was  therefore  in  all  probability  the  Sire  de 
Tracy  in  the  army  at  Hastings.  Tracy  is  in  the 
neighbourhood  of  Vire,  arrondissement  of  Caen,  and 
the  ruins  of  a  magnificent  castle  of  the  middle 
ages  were  and  may  still  be  seen  there.  In  1082  a 
•charter  was  subscribed  at  Tracy  by  a  William  de 
Traci  and  his  nephew  Gilbert  (Gallia  Christina,  xi. 
Instrum.  p.  107),  one  or  the  other  being  most 
likely  the  son  of  Turgis,  and  the  father  of  Henry  of 
Barnstaple. 

The  name  of  Tracy-  is  principally  known  to  the 
readers  of  English  history  from  the  unenviable  noto- 
riety of  a  William  de  Tracy,  one  of  the  cowardly  mur- 
derers of  Thomas  &  Becket,  Archbishop  of  Canterbury, 
A.D.  1170  ;  but  his  connection  with  the  inain  line  is 
obscure,  as  in  his  charter  granting  to  the  Canons  of 
Torre,  in  the  county  of  Devon,  all  his  lands  at  North 
Chillingford,  he  writes  himself  William  de  Traci,  son 


298         THE  CONQTJEBOR  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

of  Gervase  de  Courtenay,  whose  name  I  do  not  find 
in  the  pedigree  of  that  house. 

TREGOZ,  "cil  ki  done  tenoit,"  1.  13,669. — Tregoz  is 
in  the  arrondissement  of  St.  L6.  The  ruins  of  a  castle 
were  existing  lately  at  the  confluence  of  the  Vire  and 
the  brook  of  Marqueran,  but  the  name  of  him  "  who 
then  held  Tregoz"  is  unknown  to  me.  Mr.  Edgar 
Taylor,  in  his  notes  to  Wace,  says  "  Jeffery  de  Tregoz- 
would,  according  to  Dugdale  (Baronage,  i.,  615),  be 
the  probable  contemporary  of  the  Conquest."  What 
he  founds  that  opinion  upon  I  am  at  a  loss  to  dis- 
cover. The  first  Geoffrey  de  Tregoz  mentioned  by 
Dugdale  was  the  son  of  a  William  de  Tregoz,  who  in 
1131  had  the  lands  of  William  Peverel  of  London  in 
farm,  and  therefore  even  he  could  not  have  been  old 
enough  in  1066  to  have  fought  at  Senlac,  where  Wace- 
tells  us  that  "  he  who  then  held  Tregoz  "  killed  two 
Englishmen,  transfixing  one  with  his  lance  and  cleav- 
ing the  skull  of  the  other  with  his  sword,  and  galloping 
back  unwounded  by  the  enemy.  It  may  have  beerr 
the  father  of  that  William  who  performed  that 
exploit  ;  but  Dugdale  takes  us  no  higher  than  Wil- 
liam. A  Robert  de  Tregoz  was  Sheriff  of  Wiltshire 
and  a  distinguished  warrior  in  the  time  of  Richard  I.y 
and  the  name  has  descended  to  us  in  his  old  place  of 
residence  in  the  above  county — Ledyard-Tregose. 


TROSSEBOT.  299 


TROSSEBOT,  1.  13,711. — This  name  is  coupled  with 
that  of  Botevilain  by  Wace  as  two  warriors  who  feared 
neither  cut  nor  thrust,  fighting  furiously  that  day,  and 
giving  and  receiving  severe  blows.  M.  le  Prevost 
could  not,  however,  trace  the  origin  of  this  family  in 
Normandy,  and  a  William  Troussebot  is  first  brought 
to  our  notice  in  the  reign  of  Henry  I.  by  Orderic 
Vital,  who  includes  him  amongst  the  men  of  low 
origin,  whom  for  their  obsequious  services  that  sove- 
reign raised  to  the  rank  of  nobles,  raising  them  as  it 
were  from  the  dust,  heaping  wealth  upon  them,  and 
exalting  them  above  earls  and  noble  lords  of  castles- 
(lib.  xi.  cap.  2).  The  Troussebots  are  supposed  to  have 
been  resident  in  the  north-western  part  of  the  district 
of  Neubourg,  near  the  domain  of  Robert  de  Harcourt,. 
whose  daughter  Albreda  became  the  wife  of  William 
Trussbot  above  mentioned,  son  of  Geoffrey  and  grand- 
son of  Pagan  Troussebot,  who  in  all  probability  was-- 
the  combatant  at  Senlac. 

Geoffrey  Fitz  Payne,  as  he  is  called,  was  seated 
before  the  reign  of  Henry  I.  at  Wartre  in  Holdernessr 
in  the  county  of  York,  and  the  family  was  thenceforth, 
styled  the  Trusbutts  of  Wartre.  The  male  line  failed  by 
the  death  of  the  three  sons  of  William  without  issue,  and 
their  three  sisters,  Rose,  Hillarie,  and  Agatha,  became- 
heirs  of  the  estates.  The  two  latter  dying  childlessr 


300         THE  CONQUEROB,  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 


the  whole  property  devolved  upon  William  de  Eos, 
grandson  of  Eose,  who  married  Everard  de  Eos,  a 
great  baron  in  Holderness,  who  assumed  the  allusive 
.coat  of  Trussbot  of  Wartre  :  three  water-bougets. 
•"  Trois  bouts  d'eau,"  or  three  bougets  of  water. 

UEINIE,  "  cil  d',"  1.  13,705.  —  Supposed  to  be 
•Origny,  of  which  name  there  are  two  communes  in 
JSormandy,  one  near  Belesme,  and  the  other  near 
Mamers,  but  nothing  has  been  learned  respecting  the 
person  alluded  to. 

VITRIE,  "  cil  de,"  1.  13,604.— Eobert  Seigneur  de 
Vitre  (Ille-et-Vilaine),  grandson  of  Eivallon-le-Vicaire, 
is  stated  by  the  historians  of  Brittany  to  have  been 
the  person  who  is  indicated  by  Wace.  Of  him  or  his 
•deeds  we  have  no  record. 

Andre  de  Vitry  married  Agnes,  daughter  of  Eobert 
•Cornte  de  Mortain  (vol.  i.,  p.  114),  and  consequently 
niece  to  the  Conqueror.  We  have  not  the  date,  but 
.as  her  younger]  sister  Denise  was  married  in  1078, 
it  appears  doubtful  to  me  if  Eobert,  son  of  Agnes, 
*could  have  been  old  enough  to  have  fought  at  Senlac 
in  1066.  The  annalist  of  the  family  of  Vitre  states 
ithat  on  Eobert's  birth  his  grandfather  (the  Comte  de 
JMortain)  came  to  Vitre,  and  at  his  baptism  gave  him 
Ms  name  and  all  the  land  he  held  in  Trugny,  Nicey, 
.and  Vercreuil  in  Normandy.  An  inference  might  be 


VITRIE.  301 

drawn  from  this  that  Robert  was  born  after  the  Con- 
quest. 

His  son  Robert,  called  the  younger,  married  Emma, 
daughter  of  Alan  de  Dinan,  and  their  only  daughter, 
Eleanora  de  Vitre,  married,  1st,  William,  son  of  Fulk 
Painel,  2ndly,  Gilbert  de  Tillieres,  and  Srdly,  William 
Fitz  Patrick,  second  Earl  of  Salisbury,  whom  she  also 
survived,  and  married  4thly  Gilbert  de  Malmaines, 
outlived  him,  and  died  in  1233.  She  is  generally 
stated  to  have  been  the  mother  of  Ela,  sole  daughter 
and  heir  of  her  third  husband,  the  Earl  of  Salisbury, 
and  wife  of  William  de  Longuespee,  son  of  the  cele- 
brated "  Fair  Rosamond,"  by  Henry  II.  I  have  con- 
tested that  descent  elsewhere,  but  it  is  not  necessary 
to  repeat  my  arguments  in  these  pages.  I  have  only 
to  do  here  with  the  companion  of  the  Conqueror,  who 
I  "take  to  have  been  Andre,  the  husband  of  his  niece, 
and  not  their  son  Robert,  who,  if  even  born,  must 
have  been  a  child  at  that  period. 

Only  one  out  of  the  last  twenty  names,  viz.,  that  of 
"Tracy,"  occurs  in  the  compilations  of  Messrs,  de 
Magny  and  Delisle. 


One  word  at  parting — I  lay  down  my  pen  with  a 
feelino-  of  reoret  that  I  have  been  unable  to  throw 


302          THE  CONQUEROR  AND  HIS  COMPANIONS. 

more  light  upon  the  many  perplexing  points  which  are 
forced  upon  our  consideration  in  pursuing  these 
inquiries,  by  the  silence  or  contradiction  of  the  con- 
temporary writers  to  whom  we  naturally  turn  for 
authentic  information.  In  venturing  to  differ  with 
some  of  the  most  erudite  of  the  present  day,  T  have 
raised,  however,  a  few  questions  which  will  no  doubt 
be  either  at  once  conclusively  answered,  or  if  deemed 
worthy  of  attention,  lead  to  further  investigation,  with 
probably  interesting  results.  I  have  no  desire  to 
awaken  controversies  which  end  in  convincing  nobody, 
and  too  often  offend  somebody.  The  great  object  we 
have  all  at  heart  is  truth,  and  I  can  sincerely  adopt 
the  words  of  my  old  friend  and  master,  the  late  Sir 
Samuel  Eush  Meyrick,  who  was  wont  to  say,  "  the 
greatest  pleasure  any  one  can  give  me,  next  to  proving 
me  to  be  right,  is  kindly  showing  me  where  I  am 
wrong." 


INDEX. 


VoL  1. 

Vol.  2. 

VoLl. 

Vo 

Abetot 

150 

Coutances,    Geoffrey 

Abeville  or  Apeville   . 

277 

Bishop  of 

25 

Aigle 

159 

Crevecceur  . 

242 

Aincourt    . 

236 

Crispin 

191 

Albini 

90 

Dapifer  (Eudo)  . 

126 

Ansneville 

239 

Epine 

285 

Asnebec 

280 

Estouteville 

253 

Asnieres 

280 

Eu,  Count  of      .         .    257 

Aulnay 

203 

Evreux,  Count  of        .    248 

Aunou 

132 

Ferrers 

C6 

Auvilliers  . 

281 

Ferte 

285 

Avranch.es  . 

16 

Fitz  Erneis 

185 

Bayeux,  Odo  Bishop  of      88 

FitzOsbern         .         .173 

Beauchamp 

172 

Fitz    Rou,    Toustain 

Beaumont  .         .         .     203 

(Le  Blanc)      .         .    227 

Belfou 

283 

Fougeres    . 

225 

Bertram 

247 

Gael  .... 

1 

Bertran 

281 

Gascie 

286 

Biarz  .... 

198 

Giffard       .         .         .160 

Bienfaite   . 

33 

Glos  .... 

286 

Bigod 

54 

Gournay    . 

109 

Bohun 

63 

Goviz 

286 

Bonnebosq 

282 

Grentmesnil 

75 

Botevilain  . 

282 

Harcourt    . 

229 

Boulogne,   Eustace 

Ivri   .... 

220 

Count  of          .         .148 

Jort  .... 

286 

Bretagne,  Counts  Alain 

Lacy  .... 

153 

of  .         .         .         .264 

La  Lande  (Patry) 

187 

Brevere      .         .         .127 

La  Mare     . 

287 

Briencourt 

282 

LaVal                 .         .     145 

Caffly 

283 

Lithaire      .         .        . 

287 

Cartrai 

284 

Malet 

94 

Chaignes    . 

284 

Mandeville          .         . 

73 

Champagne,  Odo  Count 

Marmion    . 

167 

of  .         .         .         .118 

Meules 

40 

Chapel,  Eudo  al  . 

124 

Mohun 

120 

Columbieres 

251 

Molei 

287 

Combrai     .         . 

285 

Monceals   . 

288 

Courci         .         . 

83 

Montfort    .        .        .167 

304 


INDEX. 


VoL  1.    VoL  2.    |  VoL  1.    VoL  2. 

Montfichet          .         .  49  St.  Sever    ...                  291 

Montgomery        .         .181  St.  Valeri  ...  207 

Mortagne  .          .         .261  Sap    ....  292 

Mortain.  Count  of       .  107  Say    ....                  244 

Mortemer  .         .         .  232  Semillie      .         .         .                  295 

Moulins      ...  106   '  Solignie      .         .         .                   295 

Mowbray   ...  25  ',  Taisson.  or  Tesson      .                  104 

Nevil          .         .         .  134  Tankerville         .         .                  148 

Oiley          .         .         .  213  Thouars      .         .         .242 

Pacie          ...  288  Toeni          .         .         .217 

Painel        .         .         .  234  Torneor      . 

Percy         .         .         .  182  :  Tornieres   . 

Peverel       .         .         .  258  Touques     . 

Pins  ....  289  Toustain     le     Blanc 

Pirou          ...  289           (Fitz  Rou)      .         .    227 

Port  ....  249  Trade 

Praeres       ...  289  Tregoz 

Rebercil     ...  290  !  Trossebot   . 

Redvers      ...  45  Urinie 

Roumare    *        .         .  144  Vesci 

Sacie          .         .         .  294  Yieuxpont 

St.  Cler      ...  290  Vitrie 

Sainteals    .         .         .  294  Warren       .         .         .131 

St.  Martin .         .         .  291  William  the  Conqueror        1 

St.  Sauveur         .         .  140  Family  of  .      77 


THE   END. 


,  Aosrw,  &  CO.,  PRINTERS,  WHITEFRIARS. 


0 


BINDING          :.FEB231968 


DA 
197 
P6 
v.2 


Planche,  James  Robinson 
The  Conqueror  and  his 
companions 


PLEASE  DO  NOT  REMOVE 
CARDS  OR  SLIPS  FROM  THIS  POCKET 

UNIVERSITY  OF  TORONTO  LIBRARY